sgraenitz added a comment. Thanks for your feedback. I should have mentioned that this is pretty much a draft. For now I was happy it works at all.
In D62859#1529498 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D62859#1529498>, @stella.stamenova wrote: > I don't think that this would apply very well to Visual Studio with the > current change because it is likely that if you are using VS to build LLDB, > you also used VS to build the dependencies. Good point > I think a better change would be to allow a parameter to be passed like your > suggested `LLDB_PROVIDED_NINJA_BUILD_TREE=On` (except don't use Ninja in the > name, how the tree came about is not important and it could also be make or a > tree copied from another build) and then use that and LLDB_BUILT_STANDALONE > for the pivot. Then if someone provides the new parameter, they know what > they are doing and we can expect it to work for Xcode and VS both. Yes, then it's either that or what Pavel proposed. In D62859#1529666 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D62859#1529666>, @labath wrote: > > LLDB_PROVIDED_NINJA_BUILD_TREE=On > > An even better option would be to get the llvm build to export the fact > whether it was built with a multi-config generator or not. Then the user > wouldn't have to provide anything, and things would "just work". :) Yes, I will check if I can store it in LLVMConfig.cmake Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D62859/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D62859 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
