similar to: How to build only the necessary components with MSVC

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: > Chris Bieneman is probably your best bet, and maybe also Dan Liew. > Hans, My current, and hopefully final, revision of the proposed patch is simplified and reworked to solve the problem entirely from cmake without touching the the llvm-build python scripts. Basically, the new fix for avoiding the

Hans, I have posted a complete patch for solving the linkage issues with LLVM_LINK_LLVM_DYLIB on Phabricator at http://reviews.llvm.org/D16945. The bulk of the fix the simple changes of... Index: cmake/modules/AddLLVM.cmake =================================================================== --- cmake/modules/AddLLVM.cmake (revision 259743) +++ cmake/modules/AddLLVM.cmake (working copy) @@

Hi folks, I’m trying to port some code built on top of LLVM/Clang to Windows, however I just discovered that the precompiled versions from releases.llvm.org are missing all the libLLVM* and libclang* dlls. Also, some tools (e.g. opt) are missing on Windows as well. I’m curious whether it’s a technical limitation (i.e. certain things don’t work on Windows), or something else? For the others out

Sorry I’m a little late to this thread. There has been some discussion about using CMake to generate shared libraries. Since I’ve done some patches in this area recently I thought I’d take a minute to explain the current state of things. Historically LLVM’s CMake build system has been able to produce shared libraries for each of the llvm static libraries. My patch (r220490) added the llvm-shlib

Sorry to trouble you, great software, I have it on Ubuntu 14.10, Windows 10 and now I was trying ARM: I have been trying to build a working Cland+LLVM for 4 days now, ARM Radxa Rock Pro Quad 1.6Ghz 2GB memory I'm building on an SD card, I tried 4GB and died(space thing), 8GB and died(again with the space thing) so I read everything I could find on building only a minimum testing build and I

On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 11:19:22PM +0000, Eric Christopher wrote: > On Fri Oct 31 2014 at 3:11:22 PM Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I would like to propose deprecating the autoconf build system at some > > point in the future. Maintaining two build systems is a hassle not > > only for this project, but also for other projects

Over the past few years the LLVM CMake build system has gained a lot of new features, which have powered new workflows and capabilities. This development has largely been individual efforts without focus or long-term direction. The build system is of incredible importance to LLVM as it is a primary interface for contributors to build and test their changes. This year, LLVM is making a huge

Hi all, I run a build bot which updates and builds trunk llvm on a variety of OSes once every four hours. The windows build has been broken since r246156: http://104.154.46.123:8010/builders/win-64-trunk. A full clean didn't seem to fix it. Neither did several more recent updates (I'm currently building at 246208). The specific error is at the end of this log:

Hi all, I want to use the LLVM_DISTRIBUTION_COMPONENTS support to create an installed toolchain image (via the install-distribution target). I'd also like the installed binaries to be stripped. If you're invoking a cmake install script directly, you can pass -DCMAKE_INSTALL_DO_STRIP=1 to cmake to request stripping. The install-* targets set up by LLVM's build system don't seem to

> On Jan 14, 2016, at 11:22 AM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Jan 14, 2016, at 9:38 AM, Chris Bieneman via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> >>> On Jan 14, 2016, at 5:18 AM, Dan Liew <dan at su-root.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>> On 14 January 2016 at 11:24, David Jones via llvm-dev

Hey Chris, Sedat was asking for a way to "to speedup my build" and those blog posts were really helpful to me. Anyway LLVM_DISTRIBUTION_COMPONENTS sounds very cool, hope you will push your code soon! On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 11:32 PM, Chris Bieneman <cbieneman at apple.com> wrote: > Fabio, the work I was mentioning here is an extension beyond those blog > posts. > >

Jeremy, At this point the belief is that there are no issues left blocking removing autoconf. The plan is to remove it after the 3.8 branch. In case you missed the thread where that was decided it is here (http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2015-November/092150.html <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2015-November/092150.html>). This discussion has been going on for over a

> On Mar 2, 2016, at 4:22 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote: > > I got some more inspirations on how to speedup my build and integrated > the URLs into my scripts (attached). > > For example to use GOLD as linker or to use '-O3' OptLevel maybe in > combination with LTO and PGO (using '-O3 -flto -fprofile-use'). LTO *will* slow down

Hi, In SUSE we have recently switched from building LLVM as multiple shared libraries (using BUILD_SHARED_LIBS) to building it as a single shared library (using LLVM_BUILD_LLVM_DYLIB). The multiple shared libraries build was causing issues and apparently it is only meant for LLVM developers. Our guidelines prohibit linking against static libraries unless there is no other option. After this

For faster builds and rebuilds you should definitely read: https://blogs.s-osg.org/an-introduction-to-accelerating-your-build-with-clang/ https://blogs.s-osg.org/a-conclusion-to-accelerating-your-build-with-clang/ Hope this helps! On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 9:17 PM, ChrisBieneman via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > On Mar 1, 2016, at 10:01 AM, Mehdi Amini

And again... LLVM_BUILD_LLVM_DYLIB:BOOL=ON LLVM_LINK_LLVM_DYLIB:BOOL=ON This one is the good one... maybe. On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 11:35 PM, Alexandre Isoard < alexandre.isoard at gmail.com> wrote: > That is because I mistyped it: > LLVM_ENABLE_LLVM_DYLIB:BOOL=ON > LLVM_LINK_LLVM_DYLIB:BOOL=ON > > On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Wink Saville <wink at saville.com>

> On Oct 24, 2019, at 02:17, Alex Denisov via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi Chris, > > This is a great initiative and it feels like the right direction. > > I'd like to add another point to the list: using LLVM as a library, i.e. being able to add it as a CMake subproject. > Currently it works pretty good, but some parts can be improved

On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 5:53 PM <luke-tierney at uiowa.edu> wrote: > > On Sun, 7 Jun 2020, peter dalgaard wrote: > > > So this wasn't tested for a month? > > > > Anyways, Free() is just free() with a check that we're not freeing a null pointer, followed by setting the pointer to NULL. At that point of tcltk.c, we have > > > > for (objc = i = 0;

Hi, the first question is addressed both to llvm-dev and gentoo-dev. The second one is Gentoo specific. Is there any possibility to build LLVM both as static and shared libraries? What I see currently is that our ebuild makes LLVM to build shared libs unconditionally. Is there a possibility (if it is impossible to build both lib types) to at least give to user control on what kind of libs he

Hi, I have application, where I am reciving the RTP packets, which has OPUS payload. >From the RTP packets I got following information: (12 byes Header) tells about the version, payload time, time stamp, srsc, etc. The rest of the packet is OPUS payload (raw format), The TOC byte from OPUS payload tells its 20ms frame, even the time stamp different of 960 means 20 msec frame. Questions: 1)