On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 9:08 AM Raphael Isemann wrote:
> Actually the RPATH theory is wrong, but the LLVM_ENABLE_PROJECT
> workaround *should* still work.
>
I'll give that a go (it's running at the moment) though I guess this is
inconsistent with the direction libcxx is moving in for building, r
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=52223
Bug ID: 52223
Summary: GNU extension for DW_TAG_interface_type produces an
error instead of ignoring it
Product: lldb
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Actually the RPATH theory is wrong, but the LLVM_ENABLE_PROJECT
workaround *should* still work.
Am Di., 19. Okt. 2021 um 18:02 Uhr schrieb Raphael Isemann
:
>
> I just saw in your review comment that this is using
> LLVM_ENABLE_RUNTIMES and not LLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS for libcxx, so the
> failure jus
I just saw in your review comment that this is using
LLVM_ENABLE_RUNTIMES and not LLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS for libcxx, so the
failure just comes from us setting the wrong RPATH due to the
different runtimes library directory (at least from what I can see).
Would it be possible to put libcxx in LLVM_ENA
