DavidSpickett wrote: I will recuse myself from reviewing since I had input to the patch already, but want to highlight this that I said earlier:
> In theory someone could be relying on there being another clang-tblgen in > bin, maybe for installs, but that seems like a thing we can afford to break. > They were building clang-tblgen anyway, so they could stop setting > CLANG_TABLEGEN_EXE, and use the newly built one instead. This is the main risk I see with doing this, and my guess of its impact may be totally wrong. @rossburton could you add to the PR description the justification for the change, and the use case you want it for? Which I think is roughly - don't build clang-tblgen twice - it'll be used in some sort of build chain in Yocto. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/161952 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
