On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 01:52:08PM -0500, Amit Kulkarni wrote: > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 6:07 PM, Aaron Bieber <[email protected]> wrote: > > For lldb to be ported, the llvm/clang versions should be kept in sync. I > tried this a few years ago with matthew@, but we gave up since tehre were > too many ifdef with the POSIX string functions. I do believe that the > situation has improved a lot since then, since a ton of stuff has been > ported from FreeBSD/NetBSD. IMHO, a pre-requisite for porting lldb is to > sync the llvm port to the latest upstream release. I understand from > reading the commits that Brad has joined long term clang porting effort and > we have effectively forked llvm/clang to do our own stable long term > compiler as referenced by Miod a few years ago. IMHO a different port of > llvm/clang which follows latest upstream needs to be imported into the > tree. Is it time for the current llvm/clang port to be imported into base > but unlinked to the tree and make way for the latest llvm/clang port? > > Thanks
As I am working to porting rustc to openbsd, it would help a lot to have another updated llvm in ports. Currently the port of rustc (see openbsd-wip/lang/rustc) start by building llvm (using g++-4.8 as it need c++11) in order to build rustc. I have try to build rustc with the current lang/llvm port, but unsuccessfully. Thanks. -- Sébastien Marie
