compnerd added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lldb/cmake/modules/LLDBStandalone.cmake:6
+ # next to LLVM's module directory.
+ set(Clang_DIR ${LLVM_DIR}/../clang)
+ message(STATUS "Inferred Clang_DIR: ${Clang_DIR}")
----------------
sgraenitz wrote:
> compnerd wrote:
> > What happens in the standalone clang build scenario? Can I ask what is the
> > motivation for this change? I think it is better to require that the user
> > pass the path, as that is an explicit dependency of LLDB.
> I don't think there's any side-effects on Clang standalone builds. Is that
> what you mean with "standalone clang build scenario"?
>
> I would like top prevent people from writing custom build scripts on top of
> CMake. Passing a number of very similar paths to CMake, e.g. each time we
> want to generate a Xcode project for development, this option seems to become
> compelling quickly. This patch makes standalone configurations simpler.
> Basically, it provides a default value. I doesn't cut down functionality.
>
> You can still explicitly pass any path you want. This branch will then not be
> taken.
I think that the build fragmentation has caused a larger problem, and I would
like to avoid that. The standalone build scenario is:
build/llvm
build/clang
build/lldb
In this case, `../clang` does not exist (`../../clang/lib/cmake/clang` does).
I think what I would suggest instead is adding a cache file that has the
configuration parameters setup already.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D65798/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D65798
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
