llvm dev - Feb 2008 - [LLVMdev] Working on getting MingW32/native tools-only source build up

Using MingW32/GCC 4.2.1 binary release, mix of Cygwin and MingW32 
auxilliary tools, ActivePerl's Perl 5.8.8; operating system Vista.  I'm 
not going to worry about bootstrapping llvm-gcc until I know I can 
bootstrap gcc.

1) ActivePerl uses the wrong shell (cmd.exe rather than sh.exe) when 
doing backticks.  I had to moderately rewrite llvm-config to use the Cwd 
module's abs_path function before it worked.

Apologies in advance if this is already documented on the site: which 
files would I need to modify so that llvm-config gets auto-generated 
correctly?  [I haven't done the work to determine what a proper patch 
would be.  I'd think that configure would have to test for the usability 
of Cwd 'abs_path' before replacing the current $PWD implementation with 
abs_path calls, which suggests I can't compose the patch (autoconf won't
install cleanly).]

2) I'm getting massive link errors on template function instantiations 
(no tools are being created), and won't have time to properly play with 
this further "today".  It looks like they're being stripped out 
prematurely; I'll be checking the GCC documentation for how to prevent 
this when I do have time.

Kenneth Boyd

Kenneth Boyd wrote:
> Using MingW32/GCC 4.2.1 binary release, mix of Cygwin and MingW32 
> auxilliary tools, ActivePerl's Perl 5.8.8; operating system Vista. 
I'm
> not going to worry about bootstrapping llvm-gcc until I know I can 
> bootstrap gcc.
>   
I have the tools-only target building without errors on my end
:)
> 1) ActivePerl uses the wrong shell (cmd.exe rather than sh.exe) when 
> doing backticks.  I had to moderately rewrite llvm-config to use the Cwd 
> module's abs_path function before it worked.
>
> Apologies in advance if this is already documented on the site: which 
> files would I need to modify so that llvm-config gets auto-generated 
> correctly?
llvm-config.in.in, "of course".  Would a patch that tries to use the
Cmd
module, as well as the current implementation, be reasonable?
> 2) I'm getting massive link errors on template function instantiations 
> (no tools are being created), ....
>   
Libraries weren't being linked in; I worked around this by adjusting the 
affected makefiles to explicitly mention the required library 
shorthands.  I was doing a static-only build:
../llvm.svn/configure --prefix=/cpp_app/llvm.svn.obj --disable-shared 
--enable-assertions --enable-expensive-checks

Affected tools: bugpoint, llc, lli, llvm2cpp, llvmc, llvm-ar, llvm-as, 
llvm-bcanalyzer, llvm-db, llvm-dis, llvm-extract, llvm-ld, llvm-link, 
llvm-nm, llvm-prof, llvm-ranlib, llvm-upgrade, opt .

Kenneth Boyd