EricWF added a comment.
> For whether it makes sense to search for includes in the system path, that > boils down to @ldionne's question of whether building libc++abi against a > system-installed libc++ is supported. I actually don't know the answer to > that myself ... @dexonsmith and @EricWF, what are your thoughts on that? The > current search won't find the system-installed libc++ headers on Darwin > anyway though, where they're placed in the compiler's include directory > rather than a system include directory. Building libc++abi against an installed libc++ doesn't make sense IMO, so I don't care if we try to support it. Libc++abi is a lower lever component with libc++ being built on top of it. If you want to update libc++abi, you should be building a new libc++ as well. (Note: Using system libc++abi headers to build libc++ would make sense though). As an aside, libc++abi should really live in the libc++ repository. That way it would always have the correct headers available. But every time I pitch that idea I get a ton of push back. Repository: rCXXA libc++abi https://reviews.llvm.org/D48694 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
