sgraenitz added a comment. In D61952#1504346 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D61952#1504346>, @labath wrote:
> I'm not very familiar with frameworks and complexities involved in creating > them, but the fact that we need to delete stuff from the build tree in order > to install properly makes me think that there is something fishy going on. Is > there no way to arrange things so that this can be avoided? Well, maybe there are better ways to do it, but we have a number of restrictions. > For instance, what if we set the build output paths to be separate and > disjoint locations for each target. Then use a separate target, or some > POST_BUILD commands to copy/symlink the files to construct an build-tree > framework, and have the install targets create the install-tree framework > from the original build output paths? Ok, so you mean copying the entire framework to a staging directory, something like a "test-tree". Then we add test resources and run the test suite there. Sounds reasonable, I will investigate. Certainly we had to consider ordering issues too, because all external headers and libraries must be copied in first, before copying to the test-tree. In D61952#1503551 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D61952#1503551>, @JDevlieghere wrote: > How does this cleanup affect dependency tracking? Does the build dir become > unusable after running ninja install? Good point. Ideally we'd just copy them in again before running the test suite. Unlike I expected, this doesn't work at the moment. Maybe I should get this done first: $ cmake -GNinja ... $ ninja check-lldb $ ninja install $ ninja check-lldb Which other test suite invocation(s) should I verify? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D61952/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D61952 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
