similar to: [LLVMdev] Arm port

Samuel Crow wrote: >> OK, I checked the llvm-2.5 Makefiles. They have constructs in them which cannot >> be used in any BSD Makefile (such as the form of conditionals: ifndef is a GNU >> Makeism), and won't run on any BSD Make. I know BSD Make and GNU Make well >> enough, but I doon't know much about Cmake, I can say that all of the makefiles >> I saw in

Samuel Crow wrote: > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- >> From: Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> >> To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> >> Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 9:22:53 AM >> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Arm port >> >> OK, I've got enough to go on with, and I'm getting ready right now to begin

----- Original Message ---- > From: Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> > To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 9:22:53 AM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Arm port > > OK, I've got enough to go on with, and I'm getting ready right now to begin > reading the dragon book, but one question bothers me regarding the

Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> writes: >> Doesn't CMake support the BSD toolchain? > > OK, I checked the llvm-2.5 Makefiles. They have constructs in them > which cannot be used in any BSD Makefile (such as the form of > conditionals: ifndef is a GNU Makeism), and won't run on any BSD Make. > I know BSD Make and GNU Make well enough, but I doon't know

Sandeep Patel wrote: > My goal is to have Cortex-A9 support complete in far less than three > months. I've recently gotten some additional help toward that goal, so > the pace should pick up soon. > > As far as compiler texts, there are many newer texts to recommend as > just about all the major optimization passes are done differently > after SSA-form appeared in about

Óscar Fuentes wrote: > Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> writes: > > [snip] > >> Someone said that maybe CMake is already compatible with BSD make, so >> I quicly went into one of your Makefiles and took out the first >> incompatibility I found. Means ONLY that CMake != BSD Make, that's >> all. Looks to me to be a great deal more like GNU Make,

Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> writes: > I've never asked for (and wouldn't personally contribute to) any project to > generate BSD Makefiles from CMake input. My feelings are, you generate BSD > Makefiles directly, they are NOT that complicated, and making them be generated > like that reduces the simplicity, make troubleshooting more difficult. Fair enough, but

Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> writes: [snip] > Someone said that maybe CMake is already compatible with BSD make, so > I quicly went into one of your Makefiles and took out the first > incompatibility I found. Means ONLY that CMake != BSD Make, that's > all. Looks to me to be a great deal more like GNU Make, isn't that > so? As said on my previous reply to

Óscar Fuentes wrote: >> If you folks felt this would be desireable. If llvm gets brought into >> any BSD, it's going to have to be created by the BSD involved, anyhow >> ... well nearly all, I've seen recently that OpenBSD seems to be >> making use of outside makefiles in outside sourced things like Perl. >> But it would surely need BSD Makefiles for FreeBSD,

Paul Melis wrote: > You assume that the makefiles CMake produces need to do some kind of > conditional stuff. I don't think they do anything like that, as that has > already been resolved on a higher level, i.e. with CMake's own little > language used in the CMakeLists.txt files. In fact, the generated > makefiles DO seem to be usable by both GNU make and BSD make. >

Paul Melis wrote: > Hi, > > Óscar Fuentes wrote: >> Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> writes: >> >> >>>> Just checked that the makefiles generated by cmake work with `make' on >>>> FreeBSD 7.2 x86. The build fails while building `opt' because libdl is >>>> missing. >>>> >>> They

Chuck Robey wrote: >>>> >>>> >>> Uh? My FreeBSD installment has `make' and no `gmake'. `make' is indeed >>> BSD make. >>> > > In your FreeBSD system, do an "ls -d /var/db/pkg/gmake*" and see if any > directory shows up. If it does, then the only argument you can have is what > name you

Török Edwin wrote: > On 2009-05-24 20:38, Chuck Robey wrote: >> Óscar Fuentes wrote: >> >>> Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> writes: >>> >>> >>>>> Just checked that the makefiles generated by cmake work with `make' on >>>>> FreeBSD 7.2 x86. The build fails while building `opt' because libdl is

Hi, Óscar Fuentes wrote: > Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> writes: > > >>> Just checked that the makefiles generated by cmake work with `make' on >>> FreeBSD 7.2 x86. The build fails while building `opt' because libdl is >>> missing. >>> >> They absolutely do work, even on FreeBSD-current( I run that here), >>

Óscar Fuentes wrote: > Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> writes: > >>> Just checked that the makefiles generated by cmake work with `make' on >>> FreeBSD 7.2 x86. The build fails while building `opt' because libdl is >>> missing. >> They absolutely do work, even on FreeBSD-current( I run that here), >> but not using the native make (the

Óscar Fuentes wrote: > [snip] > >> Just to clarify things: have you *tried* to build LLVM with the >> makefiles generated by cmake on your BSD system? > > Just checked that the makefiles generated by cmake work with `make' on > FreeBSD 7.2 x86. The build fails while building `opt' because libdl is > missing. > They absolutely do work, even on

On 2009-05-24 20:38, Chuck Robey wrote: > Óscar Fuentes wrote: > >> Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> writes: >> >> >>>> Just checked that the makefiles generated by cmake work with `make' on >>>> FreeBSD 7.2 x86. The build fails while building `opt' because libdl is >>>> missing. >>>>

Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> writes: >> Just checked that the makefiles generated by cmake work with `make' on >> FreeBSD 7.2 x86. The build fails while building `opt' because libdl is >> missing. > > They absolutely do work, even on FreeBSD-current( I run that here), > but not using the native make (the one built as part of "make world"

On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 12:44:50AM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sat, Jan 18, 2003 at 05:50:05PM -0500, Tim Vanderhoek wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 18, 2003 at 10:38:27PM +0100, Gunnar Flygt wrote: > > > > > > Actually it seems more that some of the pors have huge "include's" > > > as /usr/ports/devel/cdk as it includes the big maninfo.mk, or >

[snip] > Just to clarify things: have you *tried* to build LLVM with the > makefiles generated by cmake on your BSD system? Just checked that the makefiles generated by cmake work with `make' on FreeBSD 7.2 x86. The build fails while building `opt' because libdl is missing. -- Óscar