On Sat, Oct 19 2019, Rafael Sadowski <raf...@sizeofvoid.org> wrote: > On Sat Sep 28, 2019 at 01:23:06PM +0200, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> sorry for the rather late reply. I've been mulling over this for a few >> days. >> >> On Sat, Sep 21 2019, Rafael Sadowski <raf...@sizeofvoid.org> wrote: >> > Long time ago I was trying to import the clang extra tool sets without >> > luck. It failed because the -extra subpackage has an effect on -main. >> > More precisely, the cmake parts from the main package. >> >> Debian (as usual) seems to have split llvm in many subpackages. Surely >> they must have hit and solved a similar problem. >> >> > For this reason, I think it is best to build/install the extra tools in >> > the main package. I'd be in charge here, too. >> > >> > I also was trying to crate an extra packages, which includes only the >> > extra parts but this rise more issue in the eco system. >> >> So which problems did you hit? >> >> > I have to deal with this topic because more and more people come up to >> > me and ask about my last try, last otto@. >> >> > That's good because I think these tools are helpful. >> >> I can understand that, but my stance is simple: my main interest for >> devel/llvm is the ports tree. >> >> I'm not happy with longer devel/llvm *build* times but hey, if that's >> the only solution available (is it?), fine, let's build those under >> devel/llvm. >> >> The size increase of the -main package is a killer IMO: 605MB -> 867MB >> on amd64. sparc64 goes from 714MB to 1.2GB. Most of this size >> increase comes from the additional executables, so removing the >> additional .a libs (if possible) does not help. >> >> So as far as I'm concerned I don't like this approach, especially with >> 6.6 on the radar. >> >> -- >> jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE >> > > Hi Jeremie, hey ports@, > > I understand your objection and I have dealt more intensively with the > install step in the llvm packege and ninja. I think I found THE > SOLUTION. I have figured out how to install ONLY the extra tools. > Besides, we don't have to build the whole LLVM stack.
>From a quick glance at the docs, this type of target is a ninja feature. If you apply the same trick to the build step: ALL_TARGET = tools/clang/tools/extra/all the build step moves from 3827 to 2065 targets, which should improve build times. > Please find attached devel/clang-tools-extra as tarball. This version > was successfully tested by otto@. > > I'd take care of the extra tools and keep the port in sync with > devel/llvm. > > OK, concerns? Thanks, RS The shared libs hack looks nasty but doesn't seem needed. Well, at least when restricting the build step to "tools/clang/tools/extra/all". I would just get rid of it. More tweaks: - swig is needed for lldb (absent from your port) - py-recommonmark is needed for sphinx docs (disabled) - devel/llvm already depends on devel/gtest, no need to replicate the dep here - on !clang archs, devel/llvm already has the proper dep on eg++, no need to replicate here Here's an updated port with those points addressed. I suspect that a lot of the arch-specific Makefile goo isn't needed any more. The -Dpowerpc bits should probably be left out.
clang-tools-extra-8.0.1-jca1.tar.gz
Description: Binary data
-- jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE
