On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Douglas Gregor <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jul 26, 2012, at 10:23 AM, David Blaikie <[email protected]> wrote: > >> While reading the "How To Setup Clang Tooling for LLVM" documentation >> ( http://clang.llvm.org/docs/HowToSetupToolingForLLVM.html ) I ran >> into a snag where the document implied that clang-check would be >> installed alongside clang. This is currently not the case - we don't >> install clang-check, at least not in the cmake build (&, given the >> presence of "NO_INSTALL = 1" in the Makefile, I assume we don't in the >> make build either). >> >> Should we? It seems like a natural enough thing to install, though I >> realize the specifics of which tools will be developed where and how >> they'll be installed is still in flux, so I figured I'd start a thread >> to discuss this rather than just committing it. >> >> [as a side note: why do we install diagtool (perhaps there's some use >> for it other than the internal diagnostic flag regression testing?) >> and c-index-test (by name I would've thought that was just an internal >> test binary)] >> <clang_check_install.diff> > > > It depends on whether we think the installation is for end-users of Clang or > for developers who want to work on Clang or Clang-based tools. I tend to > think that we should favor for former, and only install the base compiler > (clang, clang++, support headers and support libraries). If we want to have a > "developer mode" that installs everything else, that's fine.
Especially with the vim integration, the use case of clang-check I see is much more for clang-users (-> compiling their random open source project with clang) than for clang devs. Of course we're not yet at the integration level we want to be at for editors; which I can see as an objection to default-installing it in its current state. Thoughts? /Manuel _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
