srhines added a comment. In D76452#1945029 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D76452#1945029>, @MaskRay wrote:
> In D76452#1944786 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D76452#1944786>, @srhines wrote: > > > In D76452#1944733 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D76452#1944733>, @MaskRay wrote: > > > > > Another approach will be `-DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld`. It provides a > > > default value for `-fuse-ld=`. > > > > > > How does that work for Darwin builds? Is lld fully supported for MachO at > > this point, or will Clang still choose to use the preferred Apple linker? > > > I am not clear about your use case. lld can be used as > ELF/Mach-O/COFF/WebAssembly linker. If you want to build ELF objects, > -fuse-ld=lld (via clangDriver) or configure clang with > -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld. > If you want to build Mach-O objects, lld's current Mach-O port lacks > features (and will be removed). The new Mach-O port is still under > development. Right, so this is a problem when we ship a multi-target toolchain that does support targeting regular Linux, Windows, and Darwin (for host tools) in addition to Android. If we switched `CLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER`, then we would need to pass explicit flags to any Darwin builds to go back to using the system linker. > To cross build ELF object on macOS, another alternative is a wrapper named > `ld` which invokes `lld -flavor gnu "$@"` @danalbert Would this kind of idea work with your other reverted patch? I'm not sure exactly what broke on those builds. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D76452/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D76452 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
