search for: rightio

...g do exactly the procedure > described above, so this hasn't been a terrible problem for Google, but I > do think it is something that should be fixed (I'm working on another > aspect of compiler-rt bringup at the moment, so won't solve this in the > immediate future.) > Rightio > > gnu systems have a make variable, "CC_FOR_TARGET" that addresses this > problem. I imagine llvm should adopt a similar mechanism inside cmake. > Not sure I follow on the need/use of CC_FOR_TARGET compared to using the just-built clang as the CC_FOR_TARGET (which it seem...

...tly the procedure > described above, so this hasn't been a terrible problem for Google, but I > do think it is something that should be fixed (I'm working on another > aspect of compiler-rt bringup at the moment, so won't solve this in the > immediate future.) > > > Rightio > > > > gnu systems have a make variable, "CC_FOR_TARGET" that addresses this > problem. I imagine llvm should adopt a similar mechanism inside cmake. > > > Not sure I follow on the need/use of CC_FOR_TARGET compared to using the > just-built clang as the CC_FOR...

...ve, so this hasn't been a terrible problem for >> Google, but I do think it is something that should be fixed (I'm >> working on another aspect of compiler-rt bringup at the moment, >> so won't solve this in the immediate future.) >> >> >> Rightio >> >> >> gnu systems have a make variable, "CC_FOR_TARGET" that addresses >> this problem. I imagine llvm should adopt a similar mechanism >> inside cmake. >> >> >> Not sure I follow on the need/use of CC_FOR_TARGET compared to u...

...tly the procedure > described above, so this hasn't been a terrible problem for Google, but I > do think it is something that should be fixed (I'm working on another > aspect of compiler-rt bringup at the moment, so won't solve this in the > immediate future.) > > > Rightio > > > > gnu systems have a make variable, "CC_FOR_TARGET" that addresses this > problem. I imagine llvm should adopt a similar mechanism inside cmake. > > > Not sure I follow on the need/use of CC_FOR_TARGET compared to using the > just-built clang as the CC_FOR...

...tly the procedure > described above, so this hasn't been a terrible problem for Google, but I > do think it is something that should be fixed (I'm working on another > aspect of compiler-rt bringup at the moment, so won't solve this in the > immediate future.) > > > Rightio > > > > gnu systems have a make variable, "CC_FOR_TARGET" that addresses this > problem. I imagine llvm should adopt a similar mechanism inside cmake. > > > Not sure I follow on the need/use of CC_FOR_TARGET compared to using the > just-built clang as the CC_FOR...

I stumbled across what seems to be a bug (to me) in the compiler-rt build: The compiler-rt libraries themselves are built with the host compiler while the tests are built and then linked with the just-built clang. It was my understanding that the goal/intent/need was to have the compiler-rt library build with the just-built clang? Did I misunderstand that?* Sterling: Chandler seemed to think

...tly the procedure > described above, so this hasn't been a terrible problem for Google, but I > do think it is something that should be fixed (I'm working on another > aspect of compiler-rt bringup at the moment, so won't solve this in the > immediate future.) > > > Rightio > > > > gnu systems have a make variable, "CC_FOR_TARGET" that addresses this > problem. I imagine llvm should adopt a similar mechanism inside cmake. > > > Not sure I follow on the need/use of CC_FOR_TARGET compared to using the > just-built clang as the CC_FOR...