Summary of Changes

Hello@romeoxbm, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request significantly enhances xmake's built-in GCC and Clang toolchain support for cross-compilation. It refactors the Clang toolchain configuration to centralize logic and introduces robust cross-compilation detection and toolset prefixing for both GCC and Clang. These changes aim to reduce the need for custom toolchain definitions and ensure xmake correctly identifies and uses cross-compilation tools, particularly for Linux targets.

Highlights

• Centralized Clang Toolchain Configuration: The Clang toolchain'son_load logic has been refactored, moving LTO settings, architecture-specific flags (-m64,-m32), and Windows runtime configurations fromxmake.lua toload.lua. This improves modularity and consolidates configuration logic.
• Enhanced Cross-Compilation Detection and Toolset Prefixing: Both GCC and Clang toolchains now include robust logic to detect cross-compilation scenarios. They introduce an early exit if the host and target architectures match, preventing unnecessary configuration. For cross-compilation, the GCC toolchain now prepends the appropriate target prefix (e.g.,x86_64-linux-gnu-) to compiler and linker commands for Linux targets.
• Improved Architecture-Specific Flag Handling: The Clang toolchain now explicitly addsmarch flags (-m64,-m32) to various compiler and linker flags (cxflags,mxflags,asflags,ldflags,shflags) based on the target architecture, ensuring correct compilation settings.

The clang/gcc toolchain is only designed to support the host platform. Please use the cross toolchain.

it will break many things. e.g. packages, toolchain cross state, ...

and other places.

In addition, the cross toolchain is bound to the cross platform (xmake f -p cross), and many cross-compilation logics rely on the judgment ofif is_plat("cross").

e.g. install all packages (cross-compilation)

So, please specifyxmake f -p cross to do cross-compilation.

Thanks for the clarification!

The idea that something might be amiss with the current cross-compilation behavior originated from examining the Clang toolchain. In theload.lua file, I noticed the use of the--target option, but that file was only imported on Windows and MinGW. That seemed unusual to me, which is why I initially thought extending that logic more generally might be the right approach.

That said, I completely understand your point about the cross toolchain being the intended way to handle these cases, and why modifying the built-in gcc/clang toolchains could break existing assumptions aroundis_plat("cross") and package/toolchain states.

One thing I did notice, though — unless I’m missing something — is that the cross toolchain seems to rely primarily on GCC. In my case, and I suspect for others as well, using GCC is not always an option since I also need to cross-compile with other compilers such as Clang or MSVC.

I’ll take a closer look at the cross toolchain implementation and the files you pointed out to better understand how xmake handles cross-compilation internally. I definitely don’t want to push changes that could disrupt existing workflows.

If you use gcc to cross-compile, you can use the cross toolchain. No need to modify the gcc toolchain.

msvc also supports cross-compilation, just need to modify the arch. e.g. build arm64 on x86_64

If you want to improve the clang toolchain to support building other arch products, you can do so, but the premise is that you don't break the existing logic. It may need to be supported in many other places, such as the ones I just mentioned.

Cross toolchain currently mainly supports gcc, because most embedded cross-compilation toolchain SDKs are based on gcc

In addition, mingw toolchain is also cross-compiled, but it is handled by mingw platform.

Therefore, I think you should just improve the clang toolchain and modify some of the clang handling in package.tools and so on.

Perhaps we also need to improve toolchain:is_cross()

https://github.com/xmake-io/xmake/blob/dev/xmake/core/base/private/is_cross.lua

And llvm toolchain.https://github.com/xmake-io/xmake/blob/dev/xmake/toolchains/llvm/xmake.lua

• clang toolchain: clang on system, e.g. /usr/bin/clang, /usr/local/bin/clang-17, clang-18, clang-xx with system ar.
• llvm toolchain: full llvm tools, use llvmsdk/bin/clang + llvmsdk/bin/llvm-ar (first) , we needxmake f --sdk=/llvmsdk to detect it.

Therefore, I think if we want to make clang support cross-compilation, it might be better to improve the llvm toolchain to add other platform targets to support it instead of clang toolchain.

xmake f --toolchain=llvm -arch xxx --sdk=/xxx

Thanks for the detailed clarification — it's very helpful to understand the current expectations around cross-compilation support.
In my case, I need cross-compilation to work with MSVC, GCC, and Clang. What feels confusing to me is that the way xmake handles cross-compilation seems to differ quite a bit depending on the toolchain:

• With MSVC, simply setting the architecture is enough. For example (assuming I'm building on x64):

xmake f -p windows -a arm64 --toolchain=msvc

works out of the box without needing to use thecross platform or toolchain.

• For GCC, from what I understand, the expected approach is to explicitly specify-p cross --toolchain=cross.

• For Clang, it seems to require yet another approach, which adds to the feeling of inconsistency. Each compiler currently needs a different set of command-line options to achieve what is conceptually the same goal (cross-compilation), which makes the UX harder to reason about.

I also have some doubts about the role of thecross platform and toolchain in this whole picture, since their usage doesn’t seem uniform across toolchains.

Regarding improvements: I'll definitely take a closer look at the LLVM toolchain, as well as the other places you pointed out, to better understand how xmake currently handles cross-compilation internally before making any further changes.

My main goal here would be to help make cross-compilation behavior more consistent across toolchains, so that specifying-a <arch> would ideally work similarly whether the compiler is MSVC, Clang, or GCC (or any other supported).