similar to: Building an LLVM cross-compiler

You’ve hit on one of the odd historical messes in LLVM. Compiler-RT can’t really be treated as a monolithic set of libraries when you are bootstrapping. In order to even configure the LLVM sanitizer runtimes you need libc and many other OS interfaces, so when bootstrapping you need to build the compiler-rt builtins library separately from the sanitizers. This can be done either by using the

On Fri, 6 Nov 2020, Cág via llvm-dev wrote: > The process, in my opinion, should go like this: > 1. Get the sources (llvm, lld, compiler-rt, libunwind, libcxx...). > 2. Build an LLVM cross-compiler toolchain using native distribution's > compiler (i.e. build an x86_64 clang executable that targets aarch64). > 3. Cross-compile libc and other libraries/dependencies to run the

You could try using zig for this. Here's an example build script of zig cross compiling llvm, lld, clang, and finally itself: https://github.com/ziglang/zig-bootstrap You can see the build script is not too complicated. The main trick is using CC and CXX to use `zig cc` and `zig c++` as drop-in replacements for a C and C++ compiler, respectively. I wrote some more details about this

> -----Original Message----- > From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Cág via > llvm-dev > Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 8:49 AM > To: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Building an LLVM cross-compiler > > Hi everyone, > > Just a quick update. Here's what worked for me here*: > 1. Get the sources. > 2.

Hi everyone, Just a quick update. Here's what worked for me here*: 1. Get the sources. 2. Build clang, llvm, lld. 3. Install libc headers to a sysroot. 4. Build compiler-rt builtins and crt with the freshly-built clang. One need to set C_COMPILER_WORKS to skip the checks. 5. Build libc.a/libc.so Now the freshly-built clang can compile a "Hello, World" program. @Martin Storsjö

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 12:33 PM Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at codesourcery.com> wrote: > On 12/19/17 12:53 PM, Petr Hosek wrote: > > 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

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 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: >

> On Nov 2, 2015, at 11:41 AM, Vasileios Kalintiris <Vasileios.Kalintiris at imgtec.com> wrote: > >> The problem comes when bootstrapping a cross-compiler toolchain. In order to >> have a cross-compiling toolchain that can build a “hello world” application you >> need four basic components: >> >> (1) clang >> (2) ld >> (3) libclang_rt

Thus wrote David Demelier via llvm-dev: > Also you will need to add more options to the components. See for example: > > LIBCXX_CXX_ABI=libcxxabi > LIBCXX_USE_COMPILER_RT=On > LIBCXXABI_USE_LLVM_UNWINDER=On > LIBCXXABI_USE_COMPILER_RT=On > LIBCXX_HAS_GCC_S_LIB=Off > LIBUNWIND_USE_COMPILER_RT=On > > And as mentioned above > > CLANG_DEFAULT_CXX_STDLIB=libc++

> On Dec 18, 2016, at 3:48 AM, Dmitry Golovin <dima at golovin.in> wrote: > > > > 16.12.2016, 18:23, "Vedant Kumar" <vsk at apple.com>: >>> On Dec 16, 2016, at 7:06 AM, Dmitry Golovin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> >>> I want to build LLVM-based toolchain with Musl, I have LLVM sources with clang and

Hi, I am trying to build the LLVM suite on a RedHat Enterprise Linux clone (Scientific Linux <https://www.scientificlinux.org/>). In the latest attempt, the build seems to complete without any explicit failures but the `check-all` process fails. Any ideas about what is wrong or suggestions for how to proceed would be much appreciated. This is the current procedure: sudo yum install

Hello everyone, Below are some buildbot numbers for the last week of 4/29/2018 - 5/5/2018. Please see the same data in attached csv files: The longest time each builder was red during the week; "Status change ratio" by active builder (percent of builds that changed the builder status from greed to red or from red to green); Count of commits by project; Number of completed builds,

Hm, I tried to reproduce this as well, but unsuccessfully. From the crash report: EXC_I386_GPFLT means we’re dereferencing a non-canonical pointer, in this case “0x00486000000025df”. This happens at wrap_OSSpinLockLock+17, which is just after the prologue and just after calling cur_thread(). So I’d say it happens when we’re dereferencing the pointer returned by cur_thread(). On OS X, we’re

Hello everyone, Below are some buildbot numbers for the last week of 12/11/2016 - 12/17/2016. Please see the same data in attached csv files: The longest time each builder was red during the last week; "Status change ratio" by active builder (percent of builds that changed the builder status from greed to red or from red to green); Count of commits by project; Number of completed

Hello everyone, Below are some buildbot numbers for the week of 2/25/2018 - 3/03/2018. Please see the same data in attached csv files: The longest time each builder was red during the week; "Status change ratio" by active builder (percent of builds that changed the builder status from greed to red or from red to green); Count of commits by project; Number of completed builds, failed

Hello everyone, Below are some buildbot numbers for the last week of 3/04/2018 - 3/10/2018. Please see the same data in attached csv files: The longest time each builder was red during the week; "Status change ratio" by active builder (percent of builds that changed the builder status from greed to red or from red to green); Count of commits by project; Number of completed builds,

Hello everyone, Below are some buildbot numbers for the last week of 3/18/2018 - 3/24/2018. Please see the same data in attached csv files: The longest time each builder was red during the week; "Status change ratio" by active builder (percent of builds that changed the builder status from greed to red or from red to green); Count of commits by project; Number of completed builds,

Hello everyone, Below are some buildbot numbers for the week of 1/21/2018 - 1/27/2018. Please see the same data in attached csv files: The longest time each builder was red during the week; "Status change ratio" by active builder (percent of builds that changed the builder status from greed to red or from red to green); Count of commits by project; Number of completed builds, failed

Hello everyone, Below are some buildbot numbers for the last week of 12/31/2017 - 1/06/2018. Please see the same data in attached csv files: The longest time each builder was red during the week; "Status change ratio" by active builder (percent of builds that changed the builder status from greed to red or from red to green); Count of commits by project; Number of completed builds,