Eric Christopher via llvm-dev
2021-Feb-09 20:46 UTC
[llvm-dev] [PROPOSAL] Add Bazel Build Configuration to the LLVM Monorepo
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 3:22 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz < glaubitz at physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:> Hi Geoffrey! > > On 2/9/21 9:09 PM, Geoffrey Martin-Noble via llvm-dev wrote: > > The review of "Add Bazel Build Configuration to the LLVM Monorepo" begins > > now and runs through 2021-02-23 (two weeks). The proposal is available > > online > > < > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-www/blob/main/proposals/LP0002-BazelBuildConfiguration.md > > > > Bazel currently does not build on any 32-bit architecture and has issues > even > on some 64-bit architectures like MIPS or RISC-V: > > > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=bazel-bootstrap&suite=sid > > Is there any chance this can get fixed before accepting Bazel support into > LLVM? > >Why would this be a limiting factor? It just wouldn't work on those platforms? -eric -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20210209/ce4a0011/attachment.html>
Geoffrey Martin-Noble via llvm-dev
2021-Feb-09 21:00 UTC
[llvm-dev] [PROPOSAL] Add Bazel Build Configuration to the LLVM Monorepo
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 12:46 PM Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote:> > > On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 3:22 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz < > glaubitz at physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote: > >> Hi Geoffrey! >> >> On 2/9/21 9:09 PM, Geoffrey Martin-Noble via llvm-dev wrote: >> > The review of "Add Bazel Build Configuration to the LLVM Monorepo" >> begins >> > now and runs through 2021-02-23 (two weeks). The proposal is available >> > online >> > < >> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-www/blob/main/proposals/LP0002-BazelBuildConfiguration.md >> > >> >> Bazel currently does not build on any 32-bit architecture and has issues >> even >> on some 64-bit architectures like MIPS or RISC-V: >> >> > >> https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=bazel-bootstrap&suite=sid >> >> Is there any chance this can get fixed before accepting Bazel support >> into LLVM? >> >> > Why would this be a limiting factor? It just wouldn't work on those > platforms? > > To expand a bit on Eric's response, the intent here is *not* to make Bazela supported build system for LLVM or to replace CMake (which I believe the proposal makes clear), but rather to enable Bazel usage and shared configuration for people and projects that already use it. I do not expect that Bazel will cover all the use cases currently supported by LLVM CMake any time soon (ever?).I don't work on Bazel itself, so have no insight on the support plan for those architectures. Only developers interested in working with Bazel would be expected to use or update the configuration, so lack of support for specific architectures should not affect things, I think.> -eric >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20210209/f30d5d21/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 3992 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20210209/f30d5d21/attachment.bin>
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz via llvm-dev
2021-Feb-09 21:01 UTC
[llvm-dev] [PROPOSAL] Add Bazel Build Configuration to the LLVM Monorepo
On 2/9/21 9:46 PM, Eric Christopher wrote:>> Is there any chance this can get fixed before accepting Bazel support into >> LLVM? >> >> > Why would this be a limiting factor? It just wouldn't work on those > platforms?Because the portability of the build system shouldn't be limiting the portability of the project I'm trying to build. Out of curiosity: Is there any key factor where Bazel beats other build systems? Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer - glaubitz at debian.org `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz at physik.fu-berlin.de `- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913