Re: LLVM 3.2: official stable port is still LLVM 3.1. Basesystem missing important LLVM pieces!

On 6 Jan 2013 14:57, "Dimitry Andric" <dim_at_freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> On 2013-01-06 15:16, Erik Cederstrand wrote:
> ...
>
>> I think the real problem is that LLVM and the related tools are build in
one go, so you can't easily build llvm-config and others for the base
version of LLVM.
>
>
> Well, it would be easy enough to build llvm-config, but what should its
> output be?  We do not install llvm/clang headers or libraries into the
> system, so llvm-config would not give any meaningful -I or -L flags. :)
>
>
>
>> llvm-config needs shared libraries that are not installed in base
because they supposedly require a prohibitive amount of build time.
>
>
> Again, build time is not the problem.  The libraries are already built,
> but in static form; making them dynamic would not be that difficult, but
> installing them would add another maintenance and compatibility burden.
>
>
>
>> The LLVM port could be split up instead. There could be a
devel/llvm-libs port that installed the shared libs for the base LLVM, and
then a devel/llvm-config, devel/scan-build or devel/mclinker port that
depends on the former port.
>
>
> Yes, this seems to be the proper approach.  But, as far as I understand,
> the ports system cannot yet do one work tree build, and package that up
> in different packages, such as -libs, -devel, and so on.

No, but it can be done if the parts are compiled separately, à la
postgresql-* ports.

Is this definitely impossible?  It's crudely but effectively done with
pgsql by only running make in certain directories...

Chris