Thiago Macieira wrote: > On Friday 11 September 2015 10:24:32 René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> I've only ever tested LTO builds on Linux. That's where llvm-ar comes from -- > the *official* clang + LLVM build. Quick check: my llvm 3.5.1 build on Linux indeed has llvm-ar, but it's got a -3.5 suffix like all other user-visible commands. I think that's what's official on Debian/Ubuntu at least; does Qt's build system pick up binaries named that way? >> It seems that the ar command works too though it complains about and ignores >> invalid debug info (which fits in with though doesn't fully explain my >> experience that LTO builds lack debug information in shared libraries). > > That depends on whether the .o files were fat or thin. I don't know of a way to chose between those options with clang, but if I understand you correctly and the .o files were thin, wouldn't that also cause executables to lack debugging info? Because executables do seem to have everything for normal debugging. R. _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
