On November 5, 2020 4:25:23 PM GMT+01:00, Nathan Sidwell <nat...@acm.org> wrote: >On 11/5/20 8:33 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > >> Moving the module mapper to a more easily (build-)testable location >> and to a place where host dependences can be more easily fixed >> & customized than in a bootstrapped directory would be nice. Thus, >> I think the module mapper should be in the toplevel somehow >> and independently buildable. > >Ok, that makes sense. It is where it is, because originally it was >much >more tightly coupled with cc1plus. > >The mapper-server and cc1plus do share some (maybe just one?) obj >files. >The in-process resolving and the server's default have the same >functionality. > >For bootstrap cc1plus needs them, so I guess they should remain in >gcc/cp/? The alternative would be to put them in new mapper-server dir
Guess some file you can include from the mapper dir (and thus build it twice) would work? I'm not suggesting another static library, if the maybe libiberty if the thing is remotely generic. >and have it provide somekind of library that cc1plus could link with. >However that'll probably mess up bootstrap. > >Having a --with-module-mapper configure option seems sensible. > >nathan
