llvm dev - May 2009 - [LLVMdev] Arm port

> Would that be something you might wish to add?
Patches are always welcome (c). Also somebody should continuously
maintain them otherwise they will become pretty useless soon.

-- 
With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University

On May 22, 2009, at 8:41 AM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote:
>> Would that be something you might wish to add?
> Patches are always welcome (c).
Let me nix the idea.  We don't want to go from 3 to 4 build  
systems...  We're trying to cut the number down...  If one wants, the  
right place to do this would be to ask the cmake people to generates  
BSD makefiles.  Now, for distribution tar balls, we could consider  
bundling the cmake output for many flavors of build systems, for  
example, having a prebuilt and up-to-date Visual Studio project file,  
and Xcode project files, might well be nice.

Mike Stump <mrs at apple.com> writes:
>>> Would that be something you might wish to add?
>> Patches are always welcome (c).
>
> Let me nix the idea.  We don't want to go from 3 to 4 build  
> systems...  We're trying to cut the number down...  If one wants, the  
> right place to do this would be to ask the cmake people to generates  
> BSD makefiles.  Now, for distribution tar balls, we could consider  
> bundling the cmake output for many flavors of build systems, for  
> example, having a prebuilt and up-to-date Visual Studio project file,  
> and Xcode project files, might well be nice.
Sadly, this is not possible in general. The files generated by CMake are
not guaranteed to be relocatable (they use absolute paths). That's the
reason why the old Visual Studio project files are still there: some
organization(s) using LLVM, for reasons unknown to me, require a
relocatable source tree and refuse to add CMake to their build setup.

-- 
Óscar