labath added inline comments.

================
Comment at: lldb/cmake/modules/LLDBStandalone.cmake:6
+  # next to LLVM's module directory.
+  set(Clang_DIR ${LLVM_DIR}/../clang)
+  message(STATUS "Inferred Clang_DIR: ${Clang_DIR}")
----------------
sgraenitz wrote:
> compnerd wrote:
> > sgraenitz wrote:
> > > compnerd wrote:
> > > > What happens in the standalone clang build scenario?  Can I ask what is 
> > > > the motivation for this change?  I think it is better to require that 
> > > > the user pass the path, as that is an explicit dependency of LLDB.
> > > I don't think there's any side-effects on Clang standalone builds. Is 
> > > that what you mean with "standalone clang build scenario"?
> > > 
> > > I would like top prevent people from writing custom build scripts on top 
> > > of CMake. Passing a number of very similar paths to CMake, e.g. each time 
> > > we want to generate a Xcode project for development, this option seems to 
> > > become compelling quickly. This patch makes standalone configurations 
> > > simpler. Basically, it provides a default value. I doesn't cut down 
> > > functionality.
> > > 
> > > You can still explicitly pass any path you want. This branch will then 
> > > not be taken.
> > I think that the build fragmentation has caused a larger problem, and I 
> > would like to avoid that.  The standalone build scenario is:
> > 
> > build/llvm
> > build/clang
> > build/lldb
> > 
> > In this case, `../clang` does not exist (`../../clang/lib/cmake/clang` 
> > does).  I think what I would suggest instead is adding a cache file that 
> > has the configuration parameters setup already.
> For the scenario you describe, can you point me to any documentation that 
> describes it or a bot that builds it?
> 
> > I think what I would suggest instead is adding a cache file that has the 
> > configuration parameters setup already.
> 
> How would your cache file look like?
> For the scenario you describe, can you point me to any documentation that 
> describes it or a bot that builds it?

I think a lot of linux distributions which want to provide llvm,clang,etc. as 
separate packages build in this way. And those that don't, they'd probably want 
to build it that way, but they can't do it because it doesn't work for them for 
one reason or another (the standalone builds are always a bit behind, because 
the devs usually just build everything monolithically). I know at least gentoo 
builds llvm, clang and lldb standalone. Maybe @mgorny has a better overview of 
what other distros do...


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D65798/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D65798



_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

Reply via email to