LLVM: llvm-as, llvm-ld and so on not contained in FreeBSD core contrib?

Hartmann, O. ohartman at zedat.fu-berlin.de
Sun Jun 26 19:20:09 UTC 2011

On 06/26/11 15:42, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 2011-06-25 17:53, Hartmann, O. wrote:
>> On 06/25/11 10:10, Roman Divacky wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 09:57:52AM +0200, Hartmann, O. wrote:
>>>> Hello.
>>>> Just for my couriosity: I'm missing llvm-as, llvm-ld and other 
>>>> binutils
>>>> from LLVM and was wondering why they are contained in the port's llvm
>>>> collection but not in FreeBSD's source contribution.
>>> There's no use for these utilities in FreeBSD base system.
>>>> I build FreeBSD 9 with CLANG. But as a missing llvm-as and llvm-ld (or
>>>> llvm-ar) would imply, the binaries are generated via binutils from
>>>> theGNU suite, aren't they?
>>> llvm-{as,ld,ar} are not replacements for those from binutils. llvm-*
>>> work on the llvm bitcode only and are of no use for normal object
>>> files.
>>> dim@ made a patch that adds those utilities if you really need them
>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-toolchain/2011-June/000216.html 
>>> By default when you compile things with clang it uses its own assembler
>>> (ie. it goes directly from C ->   .o) so typically only gnu ld is used
>>> in the compilation chain.
>>> roman
>> Thank you very much. Patched and works.
> What's the general opinion on applying this to -current?  Otherwise
> it'll be sitting in my private tree, possibly bit-rotting. :)  For
> people that are experimenting with llvm and/or clang, these additional
> tools might sometimes come in handy.
> For normal users, it won't have any impact, except for a few extra
> source files in the tree.  These tools will not be built by default.

I can only speak for myself and several people of my department, which 
are doing experiments with LLVM.

It is nice to have the knob building the missing tools on demand (should 
be documented anywhere). I like it and I appreciate your work.


More information about the freebsd-current mailing list