saghir added a comment.
In D155111#4495131 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D155111#4495131>, @mstorsjo wrote:
> To clarify the issue - the kind of builds that seems to be broken is builds
> with `BUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON`. The reason is that these libraries are needed is
> because the `clangd` target includes
> `$<TARGET_OBJECTS:obj.clangDaemonTweaks>`, so all the dependencies of
> `clangDaemonTweaks` would need to be included here as well. Please include
> that in the commit message description. (Is there a way to pull in those
> instead of duplicating the list?)
>
> This looks mostly ok to me, but it does add slightly more libraries than
> what's needed. As the list of libraries that now are linked into `clangdMain`
> is the list of libraries that previously was linked for the two components
> that now are `clangd` and `clangdMain`, so some of the dependencies only need
> to be moved, not duplicated.
>
> A more minimal set of dependencies, which seems to link successfully with
> `BUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON`, is achieved with this diff on top of current git main:
>
> diff --git a/clang-tools-extra/clangd/tool/CMakeLists.txt
> b/clang-tools-extra/clangd/tool/CMakeLists.txt
> index ddf9c2488819..6c21175d7687 100644
> --- a/clang-tools-extra/clangd/tool/CMakeLists.txt
> +++ b/clang-tools-extra/clangd/tool/CMakeLists.txt
> @@ -26,11 +26,7 @@ clang_target_link_libraries(clangdMain
> clangBasic
> clangFormat
> clangFrontend
> - clangLex
> - clangSema
> clangTooling
> - clangToolingCore
> - clangToolingRefactoring
> clangToolingSyntax
> )
>
> @@ -44,7 +40,20 @@ target_link_libraries(clangdMain
> ${CLANGD_XPC_LIBS}
> )
>
> +clang_target_link_libraries(clangd
> + PRIVATE
> + clangAST
> + clangBasic
> + clangLex
> + clangSema
> + clangToolingCore
> + clangToolingRefactoring
> + clangToolingSyntax
> + )
> +
> target_link_libraries(clangd
> PRIVATE
> clangdMain
> + clangDaemon
> + clangdSupport
> )
>
> Not sure if it's good hygiene to only link specifically to exactly those
> libraries that are needed and nothing else, or if it's just making things
> slightly more brittle?
Thanks for reviewing and providing suggestions. I have put up a follow up patch
for review: https://reviews.llvm.org/D155540
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D155111/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D155111
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
