Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[build system] Select llvm target #38200

Closed
Yamakaky opened this issue Dec 6, 2016 · 4 comments
Closed

[build system] Select llvm target #38200

Yamakaky opened this issue Dec 6, 2016 · 4 comments

Comments

@Yamakaky
Copy link
Contributor

Yamakaky commented Dec 6, 2016

Currently, llvm is built with all the possible targets including Mips, ARM... For development, we can speed the build by enabling only the native target (x86 or x86_64). Maybe it would also speed the build of rustc?

@japaric
Copy link
Member

japaric commented Dec 7, 2016

For development, ...

FWIW, for development I use ccache (pass --enable-ccache to configure) and building LLVM takes one minute or less on a "fresh" bootstrap. (I usually work with several branches at the same time; one docker container per branch and all of them reuse the same ccache directory)

we can speed the build by enabling only the native target

Just please don't change the defaullt. I'd be very upset if I spent several minutes building stage1 rustc just to learn that it can't cross compile anything.

@Yamakaky
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yamakaky commented Dec 7, 2016

yeah, of course.

@xen0n
Copy link
Contributor

xen0n commented Dec 28, 2016

This is such a niche use case, to the point that it's arguably already moot by use of ccache, if the sole purpose is to reduce build time. However there may be some other advantages, maybe space savings for use on some really storage-constrained systems? I don't know, it's trivial to make the list of targets configurable but the maintenance and support burden is real.

What do the Rust team think? cc @alexcrichton

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

Seems fine to me to add an option for this! We won't do it on the bots, but that doesn't mean it can't exist.

@bors bors closed this as completed in 0f8e931 Dec 30, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants