[LLVMdev] [RFC] Ideas on improving Compiler-RT CMake

[Duncan P. N. Exon Smith]

> On 2015-Jun-02, at 14:03, Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at codesourcery.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 6/2/15 2:38 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2015-Jun-01, at 19:47, Chris Bieneman <beanz at apple.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> If we drop support for building compiler-rt with GCC, this gets even simpler. Compiler-rt is *Clang's* runtime library, after all.
>>> 
>>> I don’t know if it is on the table to drop supporting compiler-rt with GCC, but that would dramatically simplify things.
>> 
>> Weird, I'd assumed building compiler-rt with something other than
>> clang was unsupported.  Maybe I'm missing something, but shouldn't
>> the only supported configuration be building with the just-built
>> clang?
> 
> The current default for an in-tree build is to build compiler-rt with whatever compiler is being used to build Clang... sometimes that compiler is GCC.
> 
> I agree though. We should always use the just-built Clang, and have that behavior be opt-out (if folks need it), instead of opt-in as it is now.

Right, it sounds like a bug, not a feature.

(I think configure+make gets this right already.)