> On Jan 18, 2018, at 5:07 AM, Pavel Labath <lab...@google.com> wrote: > > Looks like I missed a party. :) > > I'll try to give my thoughts on some of the things that were said here: > >> make -C > I don't think make -C does what you think it does. "make -C foo" is > basically equivalent to "cd foo && make", which is what we are doing > now already. Of course, you can make this work, but you would have to > pass an extra OUTDIR=... argument to make and then modify the > Makefiles to reference $(OUTDIR) for its outputs: > $(OUTDIR)/a.out: main.cc > $(CC) -o $(OUTDIR)/a.out main.cc ... > > The standard way of doing an out-of-tree build with make is to have > the Makefile in the build-directory and to set the magic VPATH > variable in the Makefile (or as a part of make invocation). VPATH > alters make's search path, so when searching for a dependency foo and > the foo is not present in the current (build) directory, it will go > searching for it in the VPATH (source) directory. You still need to be > careful about paths in the command line (generally this means using > make variables like $@ and $< instead of bare file names), but our > makefiles are generally pretty good at this already. We even have a > couple of makefiles using VPATH already (see TestConcurrentEvents) -- > Todd added this to speed up the build by spreading out tests over > different folders while sharing sources (the serial execution > problem). > > I still fully support being able to build the tests out of tree, I > just think it may be a bit more involved than you realise.
I uploaded my first attempt of implementing something along these lines to https://reviews.llvm.org/D42281 . Feedback of all kinds is very welcome! -- adrian _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
