llvm dev - Nov 2015 - metabug tracking blockers for the cmake transition

On 29 November 2015 at 01:50, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia
<jeremyhu at apple.com> wrote:
>
>> On Nov 16, 2015, at 05:30, Alex Bradbury via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>> * LLVM's autoconf-based build system is now officially deprecated,
with the
>> CMake build system being preferred.
>> [r252520](http://reviews.llvm.org/rL252520).
>
> Is there a metabug in bugzilla that is tracking bugs that are blocking
transition to using cmake?  Or is there some other way that packagers can
indicate issues that should be addressed before the autoconf build system is
removed?
>
> eg: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=19465
Chris Bieneman has been posting regular updates to the list on the
current status, listing issues viewed as 'blocking'. e.g. the recent
RFC http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2015-November/092150.html
or late October update
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2015-October/091798.html.

I don't think this information has all been entered in to bugzilla,
but a tracking bug could make sense if it doesn't already exist.
Responding to the RFC on removing autoconf thread with any outstanding
issues would also be a good idea.

Best,

Alex

> I don't think this information has all been entered in to bugzilla,
> but a tracking bug could make sense if it doesn't already exist.
See PR15732

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

Jeremy,

At this point the belief is that there are no issues left blocking removing
autoconf. The plan is to remove it after the 3.8 branch. In case you missed the
thread where that was decided it is here
(http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2015-November/092150.html
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2015-November/092150.html>).
This discussion has been going on for over a year, so it shouldn’t be a
surprise.

I see the issues you reported, I don’t consider any of them to be blocking
because they can all be worked around. That doesn’t mean I don’t think we should
fix them (because we should), it just means I don’t think they warrant any
changes in our plans to remove autoconf support.

The two main issues you’re being impacted by are 25664 and 25665.

I suspect that you are hitting 25664 because you’re setting
LLVM_ENABLE_SHARED=On, which probably doesn’t do what you think it does. There
was no equivalent of that flag in autoconf. The autoconf —enable-shared option
maps to LLVM_BUILD_LLVM_DYLIB=On in CMake.

For 25665, we will need to add an option to skip generating targets for libcxx’s
library. I can work that up today or tomorrow.

Also, make sure you are setting LLVM_BUILD_EXTERNAL_COMPILER_RT=On. If you don’t
set that you’re not building libclang_rt with the just-built compiler.

If you have other questions please let me know. I can also share our internal
packaging scripts with you off-list if you'd like. I don’t think there is
anything really secret in them, they’re just not useful to the wider LLVM
community so they aren’t in-tree.

-Chris
> On Nov 29, 2015, at 12:56 AM, Anton Korobeynikov via llvm-dev <llvm-dev
at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
>> I don't think this information has all been entered in to bugzilla,
>> but a tracking bug could make sense if it doesn't already exist.
> See PR15732
> 
> -- 
> With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
> Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20151129/bf4b739e/attachment.html>