On Mon, 1 Jun 2015 at 16:01 Sylvestre Ledru <sylves...@debian.org> wrote:
> Le 01/06/2015 09:55, Andrew Wilkins a écrit : > > On Mon, 1 Jun 2015 at 11:06 Vince Harron < <vi...@nethacker.com> > vi...@nethacker.com> wrote: > >> Hi Andrew, >> >> We're not testing that configuration so I'm not surprised that you're >> hitting problems. I'd like to look into it but we're working towards a >> release now and this isn't the most critical issue. For today, I recommend >> building without this flag. >> > > No worries. When would be a good time to ping back? I was hoping to get > the packaging updated for 3.7, but that may be too aggressive, and not > leave enough time for bug fixing. > > Also, in case I wasn't clear: I have changes ready, I just thought it > might be polite to bring it up here first, since I've not contributed > before. Building without the flag isn't really an option for Debian > packaging. The autotools-based build already links LLDB libs against > libLLVM.so, and it would be best to preserve that. > > Yep, I confirm that it is needed to move the Debian & Ubuntu packages > from autotools to cmake. > For now, I have an important number of undefined symbols. > Could you send your patch? I would be happy to test that. > Sure, I've just uploaded it to Phabricator: http://reviews.llvm.org/D10157. Vince, please feel free to ignore that one for now, as you're busy. I don't want to disrupt anyone's work. Cheers, Andrew
_______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
