From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Romain Naour Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 22:58:43 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] clang tool-chain support? In-Reply-To: <87d78eb1-45aa-6200-03fe-20998152fd1a@yandex.ru> References: <87d78eb1-45aa-6200-03fe-20998152fd1a@yandex.ru> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hi Stas, Le 03/09/2019 ? 12:00, Stas Sergeev a ?crit?: > Hello. > > Just a few toolchain-related questions from > novice buildroot user. > > - Currently it seems buildroot does not support > the clang toolchain natively, so is there any way > (preferably a documented one) to use the host's > clang tool-chain? (I've only found the way to build > clang as a target package, which is not what I need) Indded, Buildroot doesn't support yet clang as cross-toolchain. Last year Valentin worked on llvm/clang integration into Buildroot to provide llvm/clang libraries for the target. For example, this allow to enable opencl support (Clover) in mesa3d stack. I recently tested clang to build a kernel for aarch64 and x86_64, but we needs some work to build userspace application. Also, there are some questions about clang toolchain: "The long-term goal is to have a complete clang-based toolchain. The usefulness of this is questionable however." [1] If clang can be used as a toolchain, it would be great to add it as part of an Buildroot's internal toolchain. Also, the toolchain external infra should be able to import clang and it's libraries if present in a pre-built toolchain. To do so, we have to make sure that clang binaries are relocatable. [1] https://elinux.org/Buildroot:DeveloperDaysFOSDEM2018#LLVM.2FClang > > - I know that currently there are not too many > clang-only projects, but I just want to build a few > of them. As their amount may only increase > in the future, are there any plans to get the > native clang support in buildroot? > (not found in buildroot's TODO list) Can you share the list of clang only projects you are interested in? > > - buildroot seems to provide yasm instead of nasm. > While I was able to work around yasm bugs and > build the project with it, I wonder why such a choice? > Unless I am mistaken, nasm is active and yasm is > pretty much dead - I've got that impression from > reporting bugs to both projects and getting replies > (and instant fixes) only from nasm. > So any plans to switch to nasm? There is a nasm package in Buildroot for the host and the target. Yasm is also available but less used by other packages. What is you Buildroot version ? Best regards, Romain > _______________________________________________ > buildroot mailing list > buildroot at busybox.net > http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot