That seems a lot like what we've already done. I guess a GSOC student is working on the libcxxabi piece. The only advantage to using our runtime, libcxxrt, is performance and code size.
Original Message From: Lei Zhang Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 06:34 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: gentoo-dev-annou...@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] New project: LLVM 2016-08-18 21:56 GMT+08:00 C Bergström <cbergst...@pathscale.com>: > @mgorny may be able to help with some of this and has quite a bit of > experience building clang/llvm. Where I work we use a "wrapper" that > helps coordinate a lot of the moving pieces. > > https://github.com/pathscale/llvm-suite/ > > This may not be the perfect "gentoo" way to handle it, but the > approach would produce a clean and correct compiler. With llvm > dependencies getting more and more complicated, I'm not sure if it > would be possible to have both a gnu-free and also perfect > 1-project-source-repo:1-ebuild ratio. Currently the ebuilds for libunwind, libc++abi and libc++ all involve some hackery to support standalone build. And the package clang is just a placeholder, while it's actually built in llvm. Maybe we can put them all into the llvm package, and control what components to build via USE flags. Lei
