On 2011-06-25 17:53, Hartmann, O. wrote: > On 06/25/11 10:10, Roman Divacky wrote: >> On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 09:57:52AM +0200, Hartmann, O. wrote: >>> Hello. >>> Just for my couriosity: I'm missing llvm-as, llvm-ld and other binutils >>> from LLVM and was wondering why they are contained in the port's llvm >>> collection but not in FreeBSD's source contribution. >> >> There's no use for these utilities in FreeBSD base system. >> >>> I build FreeBSD 9 with CLANG. But as a missing llvm-as and llvm-ld (or >>> llvm-ar) would imply, the binaries are generated via binutils from >>> theGNU suite, aren't they? >> llvm-{as,ld,ar} are not replacements for those from binutils. llvm-* >> work on the llvm bitcode only and are of no use for normal object >> files. >> >> dim_at_ made a patch that adds those utilities if you really need them >> >> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-toolchain/2011-June/000216.html >> >> By default when you compile things with clang it uses its own assembler >> (ie. it goes directly from C -> .o) so typically only gnu ld is used >> in the compilation chain. >> >> >> roman > Thank you very much. Patched and works. What's the general opinion on applying this to -current? Otherwise it'll be sitting in my private tree, possibly bit-rotting. :) For people that are experimenting with llvm and/or clang, these additional tools might sometimes come in handy. For normal users, it won't have any impact, except for a few extra source files in the tree. These tools will not be built by default.Received on Sun Jun 26 2011 - 12:00:22 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:15 UTC