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

Don't build arm64e slice for back compatibility archives in Darwin #62815

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

edymtt
Copy link
Contributor

@edymtt edymtt commented Jan 3, 2023

Addresses rdar://102275287

@edymtt
Copy link
Contributor Author

edymtt commented Jan 3, 2023

@swift-ci please test

@edymtt
Copy link
Contributor Author

edymtt commented Jan 3, 2023

@swift-ci please build toolchain

@edymtt edymtt force-pushed the no-arm64e-in-compatibility-archives-for-darwin branch from 085dbba to 87046d8 Compare January 3, 2023 20:55
@edymtt
Copy link
Contributor Author

edymtt commented Jan 3, 2023

@swift-ci please test

@edymtt
Copy link
Contributor Author

edymtt commented Jan 3, 2023

@swift-ci please build toolchain

@@ -50,6 +50,19 @@ if(SWIFT_BUILD_STDLIB)
add_subdirectory(CompatibilityBytecodeLayouts)
endif()

macro(dont_target_arm64e_for_products_configured_in_this_folder)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not a huge fan of the macro. PARENT_SCOPE may be useful here. Alternatively, depending on how many Darwin SDKs we have, I'd prefer inlining the list remove item in the CMakeLists.txt file for each library. The Compatibility 50 and 51 libraries already have list(REMOVE_ITEM SWIFT_SDK_WATCHOS_ARCHITECTURES "arm64" "arm64e") in them. In the event that the list of SDKs changes, we already have to edit the library files anyway to fix the deployment target version.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants