[MacPorts] #50862: default targets for ports llvm and clang?
#50862: default targets for ports llvm and clang? -------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: rjvbertin@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: request | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.3.4 Keywords: | Port: llvm, clang -------------------------+-------------------------------- What would be a minimal set of architectures to target (instead of "all") by the LLVM and Clang ports, one suitable for most MacPorts users and one that would that lead to a significant reduction in disk footprint and/or build time? I'm personally not even sure that there's much interest to being able to target ARM for most users, or is common (and acceptable) practice to build iOS apps using MacPorts? -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/50862> MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X
#50862: default targets for ports llvm and clang? --------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: rjvbertin@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: request | Status: closed Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.3.4 Resolution: wontfix | Keywords: Port: llvm, clang | --------------------------+-------------------------------- Changes (by jeremyhu@…): * status: new => closed * resolution: => wontfix Comment: Not gonna do this. The matrix is complicated enough as it is. If you're worried about build time, use the binary distributions. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/50862#comment:1> MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X
#50862: default targets for ports llvm and clang? --------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: rjvbertin@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: request | Status: closed Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.3.4 Resolution: wontfix | Keywords: Port: llvm, clang | --------------------------+-------------------------------- Comment (by rjvbertin@…): This was actually a request for information! Does that thing about a complex matrix mean you couldn't simply do something like {{{ -DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AMDGPU,ARM,CppBackend,PowerPC,X86 }}} to get rid of the less likely targets? I'd try, but it seems that each time you tweak a configure (cmake) setting you end up rebuilding the whole shebang instead of only the files that require rebuilding. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/50862#comment:2> MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X
participants (1)
-
MacPorts