llvm dev - Jan 2013 - [LLVMdev] Using 'llvm-build' for out-of-tree projects

On 22 Jan 2013, at 12:04, Duncan Sands wrote:
> for an out-of-tree build you can use llvm-config to get include paths and
so on.
> I don't think there is any point bothering with llvm-build for this
case.
CMake works nicely for out-of-tree projects.  I have an optimiser plugin that
builds this way.  I'm not sure if it's fixed now, but the autoconf
builds used to not install the CMake plugins, which was a problem if packagers
decided to use autoconf.

David

P.S. Weren't we planning on removing the Make-based build system in the next
few months a year ago?

Hi David,

On 22/01/13 13:12, David Chisnall wrote:
> On 22 Jan 2013, at 12:04, Duncan Sands wrote:
>
>> for an out-of-tree build you can use llvm-config to get include paths
and so on.
>> I don't think there is any point bothering with llvm-build for this
case.
>
> CMake works nicely for out-of-tree projects.  I have an optimiser plugin
that builds this way.  I'm not sure if it's fixed now, but the autoconf
builds used to not install the CMake plugins, which was a problem if packagers
decided to use autoconf.
can you please post your project's cmake stuff somewhere, it could be
helpful
for cmake weenies like me.
> David
>
> P.S. Weren't we planning on removing the Make-based build system in the
next few months a year ago?
Yup, and I opened a bunch of bug reports for missing cmake features at that time
(eg: expensive checks) but I don't think anything happened.

Ciao, Duncan.

Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> writes:
>> CMake works nicely for out-of-tree projects. I have an optimiser
>> plugin that builds this way. I'm not sure if it's fixed now,
but the
>> autoconf builds used to not install the CMake plugins, which was a
>> problem if packagers decided to use autoconf.
>
> can you please post your project's cmake stuff somewhere, it could be
helpful
> for cmake weenies like me.
This explains how to develop a pass out-of-source. Is that enough?

[snip]

Le 22 janv. 2013 à 13:12, David Chisnall <david.chisnall at cl.cam.ac.uk>
a écrit :
> On 22 Jan 2013, at 12:04, Duncan Sands wrote:
> 
>> for an out-of-tree build you can use llvm-config to get include paths
and so on.
>> I don't think there is any point bothering with llvm-build for this
case.
> 
> CMake works nicely for out-of-tree projects.  I have an optimiser plugin
that builds this way.  I'm not sure if it's fixed now, but the autoconf
builds used to not install the CMake plugins, which was a problem if packagers
decided to use autoconf.
> 
> David
> 
> P.S. Weren't we planning on removing the Make-based build system in the
next few months a year ago?
It always lacks some important features, like building compiler-rt with
just-built clang: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=14109

-- Jean-Daniel

Jean-Daniel Dupas <devlists at shadowlab.org> writes:
>> P.S. Weren't we planning on removing the Make-based build system in
>> the next few months a year ago?
>
> It always lacks some important features, like building compiler-rt
> with just-built clang: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=14109
The configure&make build works on more homogeneous environments than
CMake. Implementing the requirement you mention seems easy enough while
using toolchains where clang/clang++ works as a drop-in replacement for
the platform compiler (i.e. gcc/g++ on Linux). For the general case, it
looks quite tricky.

The feature can be implemented for the easy case (POSIX&gcc, which, most
likely, is what everybody uses) and reject it for the rest.

BTW, is compiler-rt integrated in the CMake LLVM/Clang build process, or
is it a separate step?