similar to: How to build LLVM linked to libc++abi?

Thanks a lot, but tried it and I get this: CMake Error at projects/libcxx/CMakeLists.txt:361 (message): LIBCXX_ENABLE_STATIC_ABI_LIBRARY is not supported on OS X Why is it not supported? If I manually embed libc++abi.a inside libc++.a it seems to work. Thanks! ardi On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 4:20 AM Petr Hosek <phosek at chromium.org> wrote: > > You can use

Thanks Shoaib for a great summary. To summarize this as an answer to Louis' questions: 1. What is a "Standalone build"? What does it enable that a normal monorepo build can't? This means building any of the runtimes separately, where the runtime's CMakeLists.txt (e.g. path/to/my/llvm-project/libcxx/CMakeLists.txt) is the top-level one. The reason for using this variant is

[Cross-post to llvm-dev to make sure everybody relevant sees this] Hi, I'm currently trying to simplify the libc++/libc++abi/libunwind build systems and testing setup. In doing so, I am encountering issues related to "unusual" ways of building them. By unusual, I just mean "not the usual monorepo build with LLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS". I would like to pin down what the set of

On 5 Jun 2017, at 15:17, Jonathan Roelofs via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On 6/5/17 5:17 AM, Dmitry Golovin via llvm-dev wrote: >> I'm trying to build LLVM, Clang, LLD, compiler-rt, libc++, libc++abi and libunwind with musl-based toolchain. >> >> The configuration is the following: >> >> LIBCXX_HAS_MUSL_LIBC=ON >>

What do you expect the support for Windows to be? Certainly, I don't expect you to provide Windows support personally if you don't need it, but given that LLVM supports Windows, it should at least be done in such a way that the design lends itself to interested parties contributing Windows support. Currently clang-cl has several dependencies on having a Visual Studio installation present

On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 1:01 PM Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 8:47 PM, Petr Hosek via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> This is a followup to the discussion that started in D28791. To provide >> the context, we need a way to provide __dso_handle in Fuchsia. __dso_handle >> symbol is mandated by C++

This is a followup to the discussion that started in D28791. To provide the context, we need a way to provide __dso_handle in Fuchsia. __dso_handle symbol is mandated by C++ ABI with a value which is an address in one of the object's segments, and as such this symbol has to be included statically and cannot be a part of a shared library. Different systems provide it differently: 1. On

On 6 Jun 2017, at 21:41, Dmitry Golovin <dima at golovin.in> wrote: > > Neither is the case. The system that I want to build with this toolchain is Linux-based, but not GNUish. I would like to use musl instead of glibc and libc++ instead of libstdc++, only use binutils provided by LLVM. I think that in that case I will link libc++abi and libunwind to libc++ statically, so I will not

Hi, The minimum CMake version currently advertised for libc++ and libc++abi is currently 3.4.3. I think the oldest version of CMake actually being tested on any builder is 3.7.0, so advertising 3.4.3 is somewhat of a lie (I'm pretty sure we're using features that require a more recent version already). However, we do need to bump it to 3.8.0 at least because CMake 3.7 doesn't know

Hi all, I'm trying to add builders to zorg for libc++ and libc++abi. I think I have the builder right, but I have a few questions. First, how do I know which build slaves to use? Is it okay to just pick a few, is there some policy defining which are fair game, or do I need to add a new one? Second, is there a simple way to test the builder and config before I commit it? Here's my first

Today, there're two different locations for runtimes files within Clang's installation: compiler-rt: headers: $prefix/lib/clang/$version/include(/sanitizer) libraries: $prefix/lib/clang/$version/lib/$os/libclang_rt.$name-$arch.$ext libc++, libc++abi, libunwind: headers: $prefix/include/c++/v1 libraries: $prefix/lib/$name.$ext The scheme used by libc++, libc++abi, libunwind

On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 3:37 PM Jake Ehrlich <jakehehrlich at google.com> wrote: > disclaimer: I work at Google so don't take my +1 as an independent vote > forward. > > We would like to use this on Fuchsia and I am particularly interested in > creating a dynamic linking library for ELF with Roland McGrath's guidance. > We spoke about creating a library for writing

[Sorry about the crosspost. Since this is a clang build question but the build is invoked from the top-level LLVM directory I'm not sure where the question should go.] I've got a clang build against libstdc++ on Linux but I would really like one built against libc++/libc++abi. In other words I'd like to rebuild clang/llvm with clang using libc++ and libc++abi on Linux. I looked at

Hi, I'm working on cross-compiling llvm and sub-projects to dynamically build Clang toolchain and associated libraries for an embedded project. I'm starting with this mailing list, as I see the pattern using "config-ix.cmake" a common one; it's found in all the sub-projects. For those that are not aware, in CMake the standard approach for dealing with unique toolchains,

On 04/08/2014 16:20, Dmitri Gribenko wrote: > On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Dan Liew <dan at su-root.co.uk> wrote: >>>> Second, is there a simple way to test the builder and config before I >>>> commit >>>> it? >>> >>> I am afraid not. >>> >> >> But there is a ugly (and certainly not simple) way to partially test

Hello LLVM Developers, Within Google, we have a growing range of needs that existing libc implementations don't quite address. This is pushing us to start working on a new libc implementation. Informal conversations with others within the LLVM community has told us that a libc in LLVM is actually a broader need, and we are increasingly consolidating our toolchains around LLVM. Hence, we

On 03/24/2020 09:00 PM, Petr Hosek via llvm-dev wrote: > In October, there was a discussion about updating CMake to 3.15: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-October/136295.html. No decision was made, but maybe we should revisit that proposal? If we're going to require a newer version of CMake for some subprojects, I'd prefer to bump the minimum CMake version for all of LLVM.

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 8:33 AM Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at codesourcery.com> wrote: > On 12/19/17 9:15 AM, Petr Hosek via llvm-dev wrote: > > Today, there're two different locations for runtimes files within > > Clang's installation: > > > > compiler-rt: > > headers: $prefix/lib/clang/$version/include(/sanitizer) > > libraries: >

If your cut-n-paste is accurate, you seem to be missing a closing quote for CMAKE_CXX_LINK_FLAGS. hth... don On Jul 8, 2015 2:22 AM, "David A. Greene" <greened at obbligato.org> wrote: > greened at obbligato.org (David A. Greene) writes: > > > I looked at the instructions on the libc++ page and for Linux it > > recommends building with -stdlib=libc++ -lc++abi.

Hi Logan, I'm running the tests on libc++abi on ARM and I'm seeing some errors. On your earlier email you said you ran the tests clean, and I was wondering what magic do I need to get the same results. :) I had to change the build and test scripts a little to make it compile on Linux, but nothing radical. I also had to copy (and link) the libc++abi.so files on install/lib and use that