From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 19 07:31:09 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E9AD106564A for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 07:31:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dim@FreeBSD.org) Received: from tensor.andric.com (tensor.andric.com [87.251.56.140]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C7828FC19 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 07:31:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [IPv6:2001:7b8:3a7:0:10e7:52d2:303f:862c] (unknown [IPv6:2001:7b8:3a7:0:10e7:52d2:303f:862c]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by tensor.andric.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CD9A55C37; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:31:01 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <5007B7B8.4020206@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:31:04 +0200 From: Dimitry Andric Organization: The FreeBSD Project User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120619 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yanhui Shen References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5a1pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why not provide libclang.so in base? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 07:31:09 -0000 On 2012-07-18 14:54, Yanhui Shen wrote: > I'm using clang-complete plugin in vim, > it claims with libclang.so instead of bin/clang it works better. > > However libclang.so is not installed by a default "make buildworld && make > installworld", > even with 'WITH_CLANG_EXTRAS="YES"' in src.conf. This is because it would add quite a lot of build overhead to produce that .so file: all the object files will need to be recompiled yet again for shared library support. That said, we will probably want to provide at least a shared LLVM lib in the future, since it can be re-used by other programs. When that happens, it would not be too much extra work to provide a shared Clang library. > I have to install lang/clang *again* from ports to acquire the > "libclang.so". Most of the time, people will not need this functionality in base, which is why it is in a port. The same applies if you want the latest version, or if you want to build with any specialized options. > So why not provide "libclang.so" in base directly? > I think if it's not a general component, provide a flag something like > "WITH_LIBCLANG=YES" is also fine. It needs to be figured out properly, which costs time and effort. Both of which are currently in short supply, at least for me... :-/