Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Always add LC_BUILD_VERSION for metadata object files #114114
Always add LC_BUILD_VERSION for metadata object files #114114
Changes from 1 commit
d37fdc9
f988cbb
2939e85
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Where did 14.0 come from here? Was it just because that's the current assumed target in the other spec files?
IMO (not the reviewer here) its fine to do this but in some followup the hardcoded versions in the current catalyst target specs should get nuked. This would match what users would expect now that were reading this variable. Definitely doesn't need to be done here though I think.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I pulled it from the original implementation of this behavior that only applied to catalyst https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/114114/files#diff-6bbf6edd930f26d3b180eb5c250b0e48d8f3c5eb474e3274909ef6ae6f0d1e61L343
I agree having it configurable makes sense, at least in this case if you set
IPHONEOS_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET
it would win thoughThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I missed the lines removed in the diff, oops. That answers the immediate question then.
Do you want to take that to a followup PR or shall I? Fixing the mess that's Catalyst has been on my list forever.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can send that one after!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ah it looks like using the triple for this case 78bbe57#diff-f2aa7189f140501f7d0d283ef503e1980a9449ef0292b48b650f6e0c87bb8d6b complicates things slightly
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
iiuc it should just be making another of the
<target_here>_lld_platform_version
functions to use for this and other LLVM needs and have that source from the deployment target function. Might have missed a complication with the catalyst target though.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok sounds good I can try it after this one
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It seems like to make this work I would need to change
add_pre_link_args
to take aString
or something else since ours would be dynamically computed here, would that be a reasonable change?