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

[Explicit Module Builds] Add '-clang-target-variant' flag #79930

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 13, 2025

Conversation

artemcm
Copy link
Contributor

@artemcm artemcm commented Mar 11, 2025

#37774 added '-clang-target' which allows us to specify a target triple that only differs from '-target' by the OS version, when we want to provide a different OS version for API availability and type-checking, in order to set a common/unified target triple for the entire Clang module dependency graph, for presenting a unified API surface to the Swift client, serving as a maximum type-checking epoch.

This change adds an equivalent flag for the '-target-variant' configuration, as a mechanism to ensure that the entire module dependency graph presents a consistent os version.

swiftlang#37774 added '-clang-target' which allows us to specify a target triple that only differs from '-target' by the OS version, when we want to provide a different OS version for API availability and type-checking, in order to set a common/unified target triple for the entire Clang module dependency graph, for presenting a unified API surface to the Swift client, serving as a maximum type-checking epoch.

This change adds an equivalent flag for the '-target-variant' configuration, as a mechanism to ensure that the entire module dependency graph presents a consistent os version.
@artemcm
Copy link
Contributor Author

artemcm commented Mar 12, 2025

@swift-ci test

@artemcm artemcm merged commit 27bac69 into swiftlang:main Mar 13, 2025
5 checks passed
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.

2 participants