Hello, Jon The main idea of llvm-gcc is to be a drop-in replacement of gcc. So, if you know how to install & run gcc on your system, you should be able to do the same with llvm-gcc (thus no "Getting Started" entry). Basically the only "packaging differences" wrt normal gcc is that we're shipping w32api & mingw-runtime packages with llvm-gcc. Surely, you still need binutils installed (to get linker + assembler).> * incorrect PATH setup...currently using "c:\llvm;c:\llvm-gcc\bin;C:\Windows\system32;c:\Windows;c:\Windows\System32\Wbem"Looks ok. However, llvm itself is not required.> * incorrect dir structure...currently using "c:\llvm" and "c:\llvm-gcc" as peers...no spaces in dirs...should they be nested?No. LLVM itself is not required at all, however, no> * missing dependency...e.g. is MSys with a correct /etc/fstab required?No, msys is not required (like for normal gcc)> Would you reply with the configuration (llvm* dir layout, PATH, OS flavor, required dependencies) for the test system successfully using the binaries to build Qt?1. Just ordinary Windows XP SP2 box. No additional stuff installed 2. mingw gcc is installed in the c:\mingw, binutils is unpacked into the same dir, thus c:\mingw\bin is added to PATH 3. LLVM sources are located in the c:\llvm\src, build directory is c:\llvm\build, nothing added to PATH 4. llvm-gcc lives in c:\llvm-gcc\bin, nothing added to PATH If you have problems with invocation of gcc / llvm-gcc it's usually helps to add -v flag to cmdline to see, what it tries to executed. Hope this helps. -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University
> The main idea of llvm-gcc is to be a drop-in replacement of gcc. So, > if you know how to install & run gcc on your system, you should be > able to do the same with llvm-gcc (thus no "Getting Started" entry). > Basically the only "packaging differences" wrt normal gcc is that > we're shipping w32api & mingw-runtime packages with llvm-gcc. Surely, > you still need binutils installed (to get linker + assembler).Ahh. After extracting "binutils-2.20-1-mingw32-bin.tar.gz" into the llvm-gcc dir, I'm up and running. What threw me was the projects inclusion of 2 of the 3 other pieces that make up a typical manual install of mingw or http://www.tdragon.net/recentgcc/ I saw the runtime and w32api stuff in my very quick scan of the llvm-gcc dir and didn't bother to confirm binutils :( I still would like to see this packaging info made a bit more visible outside the ML, as well as a note clarifying whether the binary setup is still valid when the w32api, mingw-runtime, and binutils packages are updated (independently of llvm-gcc) with newer binary versions from mingw.org. It would be really helpful for those of us who currently only have a teeny bit of time to start looking at LLVM and are really bad at keeping our curiousity in check :) Take me up on my offer to submit a doc patch...point me to the proper html source and I'll send you a diff for review. Jon
Hello, Jon> What threw me was the projects inclusion of 2 of the 3 other pieces that make up a typical manual install of mingw or http://www.tdragon.net/recentgcc/ I saw the runtime and w32api stuff in my very quick scan of the llvm-gcc dir and didn't bother to confirm binutils :(Well, binutils are quite different: 1. It's GPL-licensed, thus we need to provide sources as well, which is bit inconvenient 2. You need to have headers & libs in predefined dirs to let gcc / llvm-gcc pick them w/o any additional options, this is not case of binutils - you just need stuff in path> Take me up on my offer to submit a doc patch...point me to the proper html source and I'll send you a diff for review.Just grab the GettingStarted.html page, seems to be pretty convenient place. Thanks! -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University