On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 09:53:18AM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi Efraim,
> 
> Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> skribis:
> 
> > On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 09:56:46PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> >> From: Ludovic Courtès <ludovic.courtes@inria.fr>
> >> 
> >> * gnu/packages/llvm.scm (make-clang-toolchain)[arguments]: Create 'cc'
> >> and 'c++' symlinks.
> >> ---
> >>  gnu/packages/llvm.scm | 6 ++++++
> >>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> >> 
> >> diff --git a/gnu/packages/llvm.scm b/gnu/packages/llvm.scm
> >> index 4b42c4921a..361b39710b 100644
> >> --- a/gnu/packages/llvm.scm
> >> +++ b/gnu/packages/llvm.scm
> >> @@ -476,6 +476,12 @@ code analysis tools.")
> >>                         (((names . directories) ...)
> >>                          (union-build out directories)))
> >>  
> >> +                     ;; Create 'cc' and 'c++' so that one can use it as a
> >> +                     ;; drop-in replacement for the default tool chain and
> >> +                     ;; have configure scripts find the compiler.
> >> +                     (symlink "clang" (string-append out "/bin/cc"))
> >> +                     (symlink "clang++" (string-append out "/bin/c++"))
> >> +
> >>                       (union-build (assoc-ref %outputs "debug")
> >>                                    (list (assoc-ref %build-inputs
> >>                                                     "libc-debug")))
> >> -- 
> >> 2.28.0
> >
> > Isn't this something we've turned down patches for in the past with gcc?
> 
> That is true, and, ahem, I even know a person who was against it.
> 
> But!  I think it’s a bit different here: (1) we’re only changing
> ‘clang-toolchain’, not ‘clang’, (2) while most build systems look for
> ‘gcc’ in addition to ‘cc’, few of them look for ‘clang’.
> 
> ‘--with-toolchain’ is useful even if ‘clang-toolchain’ cannot be dropped
> in (it allows you to try out different GCC versions, for instance), but
> I think it’s more useful if one can use it to build their code with a
> different free tool chain.  One use case that comes to mind is
> portability testing for C/C++ developers.
> 
> WDYT?

Do we want to have gcc-toolchain provide a cc binary then too? It seems
like it would also help people who have a project they want to build by
hand which has the compiler set as cc and they install the
gcc-toolchain.

> 
> Thanks,
> Ludo’.

-- 
Efraim Flashner   <efraim@flashner.co.il>   אפרים פלשנר
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D  14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted