search for: 19.8632

Should the binaries included in an LLVM release be generally useful to a wide audience of toolchain users, or is it OK to ship tools that are only really useful for LLVM development? If the former is the case, can we consider not shipping tools which are exclusively for testing the compiler? E.g removing these 5 binaries from 5.0.2-rc1 would have saved over a hundred megabytes in uncompressed

Please keep llvm-symbolizer in the install distribution. If a user's program crashes then I like to print out a backtrace with file name/line number if compiled with debug. Forking off llvm-symbolizer is the easiest way for me to obtain the debug information. Thanks. On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 5:27 PM, Vedant Kumar via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Should the

A new one was just added recently - Clang's diagtool. So if you're looking at how to reduce install size, might want to double check that the motivation for adding that is consistent with/not contradictory with your goals/motivations for removing these. (also since several of these are clang binaries/tools - maybe check with the cfe-dev list too) On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 2:27 PM Vedant