fwiw on Mac OS X we use libxml2 over in Plugins/SymbolVendor/MacOSX/SymbolVendorMacOSX.cpp. That plugin's initialization is #ifdef __APPLE__ over in SystemInitializerFull.cpp; we don't have ifdef guard around the use of libxml2 in SymbolVendorMacOSX itself.
> On Mar 31, 2015, at 4:18 PM, Vince Harron <vi...@nethacker.com> wrote: > > I really don't want LLDB to embed a copy of libxml2. I think we should build > it externally and reference it from LLDB. Systems with package managers can > get this trivially. Windows can download and build all dependencies with one > script. > > On Mar 31, 2015 2:10 PM, "Colin Riley" <co...@codeplay.com> wrote: > I noticed that use in cmake also. FWIW, my primary LLDB platform is Windows, > which is why we were using TinyXML2 for ease of prototyping. If libxml2 works > on all the targets we will use it - I do worry about the usual issues you get > with windows prebuilts. So source may still be required. We'll look into it. > > Colin > > On 31/03/2015 20:45, Zachary Turner wrote: >> There's already some stuff in the CMake to try to find libxml, but it's >> behind a Darwin specific branch in the CMake. So I think what would need to >> happen is that we move this into a platform agnostic codepath, and then set >> a define like LLDB_HAVE_LIBXML2 in the code to a value that indicates >> whether it is present (search clang for CLANG_HAVE_LIBXML in *.* to see how >> this is done). Then, in the code, we would need to put xml code behind a >> check for this define. >> >> On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 10:02 AM Zachary Turner <ztur...@google.com> wrote: >> A good rule of thumb for anything is that "Windows doesn't have it" and that >> holds true for libxml2 as well. It appears that libxml2 does support >> Windows though (http://xmlsoft.org/downloads.html), it just isn't something >> that's there by default. It would be nice if everyone were using the same >> thing, could we clone this repo in our own repo and then just build it >> ourselves as part of the build process. The license looks very permissive, >> but IANAL. >> >> On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 9:47 AM Greg Clayton <gclay...@apple.com> wrote: >> >> > On Mar 31, 2015, at 3:35 AM, Aidan Dodds <ai...@codeplay.com> wrote: >> > >> > On 30/03/2015 18:38, Greg Clayton wrote: >> > > >> > > I know about the register numbering stuff and I would love to see >> > > support for the "$qXfer:features:" added to LLDB. The one thing this >> > > data doesn't contain is the register numbers for the ABI (DWARF register >> > > numbers (for debug info), compiler register numbers (for like >> > > .eh_frame)), but that info could be inferred from an ABI plugin that we >> > > could infer from the "osabi" of "GNU/Linux" in the target.xml: >> > >> > > >> > > So please do submit patches that implement this and we will be happy to >> > > approve them. >> > >> > I am currently prototyping $qXfer:features support in LLDB with an aim to >> > upstream it. It will require an XML parser, so I wanted to have a >> > discussion about adding one to LLDB. >> >> Most unix variants have libxml2 that is available. I am not sure on windows >> though. I have CC'ed Zachary to get some input on windows XML (in case LLVM >> doesn't already have some support for this). >> >> > I have been using TinyXML2 in my prototype, which is open sourced under >> > the ZLib license. Is there any policy in LLDB for handling external >> > library dependencies? >> > Would there be objections to TinyXML2 making its way into the LLDB code >> > base as an external? Writing a new XML parser from scratch in LLDB isn't >> > ideal. >> >> It would be great to stick with stuff that everyone has installed and >> hopefully that is libxml2. Windows is the biggest question. I am also not >> sure if llvm or clang has any XML support, but we should first look to see >> if llvm has XML support and if not, then look for alternatives. We >> definitely do not want to write our own. >> > >> > I would still like to have a discussion about adding a plugin architecture >> > to gdb-remote making it easier to handle packets outwith the LLDB based >> > servers. The code in gdb-remote that sends and handles packets is >> > scattered over one or two huge classes, it would be beneficial to start >> > looking at breaking this up and modularizing it. At least for the packets >> > which are not supported by lldb's own RSP producers. >> >> I say just build all and any support it into GDBRemoteCommunicationClient >> and GDBRemoteCommunicationServer. I don't see the need to break it up. >> >> Greg Clayton >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> lldb-dev mailing list >> >> lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > lldb-dev mailing list > lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev > > _______________________________________________ > lldb-dev mailing list > lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
