JDevlieghere added a comment. In D45639#2705919 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D45639#2705919>, @phosek wrote:
> In D45639#2705702 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D45639#2705702>, @ldionne wrote: > >> In D45639#2703913 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D45639#2703913>, @JDevlieghere >> wrote: >> >>> This breaks `TestAppleSimulatorOSType.py ` on GreenDragon. First failed >>> build: http://green.lab.llvm.org/green/view/LLDB/job/lldb-cmake/31346/ >>> [...] >>> >>> Based on your description above, shouldn't it prefer the libc++ form the >>> sysroot? >> >> Actually, it's the other way around. In the discussion above, we say it's >> the toolchain path first, then anything provided with `-L`, and then the >> sysroot. Here you have a dylib in the toolchain root (assuming that's what >> `jenkins/workspace/lldb-cmake/lldb-build` is), so it's using that. It seems >> that the library built in the toolchain root is built for x68_64 (probably >> your host), whereas you'd need it to be built for the target (i386 >> simulator). > > Correct, that's exactly what's happening here. Since this bot is only running > `check-debuginfo` and `check-lldb`, would it make sense to stop building > libcxx altogether (that is drop `libcxx;libcxxabi` from > `LLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS`)? That way the compiler should pick up the one inside > the sysroot since that's the only one available. No, the bot is also meant to catch changes to libc++ breaking LLDB (or at least making sure we update the corresponding data formatters). I don't think that really matters for the simulator tests though. So if the toolchain takes precedence over `-L` too, how can I use the just-built compiler and make sure we continue to use the libc++ from the SDK? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D45639/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D45639 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
