jeanPerier wrote:

> The new machanism will be different from BUILD_SHARED_LIBS so not reusing any 
> of its code. On the other side it would be a significant burden now since it 
> doubles the number of configurations I have to get working and testing now 
> while it will be replaced in the short term anyway. I hope you are not 
> planning a release that requires to contain a .so for compatibility reasons?

We use it in our CI and it just makes testing and investigating runtime related 
issues a lot easier (e.g., using LD_PRELOAD to bisect runtime change issues 
without having to fully recompile big apps, or to switch between debug/release 
runtime versions).

I am not asking for a a fully tested option, I am fine with an undocumented 
-DFLANG_RT_EXPERIMENTAL_DISABLE_STATIC option that forces this removes this 
`STATIC` keyword, and I can test myself with the configuration I use.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/110217
_______________________________________________
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
  • [... Petr Hosek via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... Petr Hosek via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... Petr Hosek via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... Michael Kruse via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... Michael Kruse via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... Michael Kruse via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... Valentin Clement バレンタイン クレメン via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... Michael Kruse via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... Michael Kruse via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... Michael Kruse via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... Joseph Huber via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... Michael Kruse via llvm-branch-commits
  • [... Michael Kruse via llvm-branch-commits

Reply via email to