On 2017/04/26 00:47, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> "Ted Unangst" writes:
>
> > Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> >>
> >> clang already recognizes (and ignores) -fforce-addr but errors out
> >> on -fno-force-addr. This breaks the build of ports/databases/qdbm:
> >>
>
"Ted Unangst" writes:
> Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
>>
>> clang already recognizes (and ignores) -fforce-addr but errors out
>> on -fno-force-addr. This breaks the build of ports/databases/qdbm:
>>
>>
>>
Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
>
> clang already recognizes (and ignores) -fforce-addr but errors out
> on -fno-force-addr. This breaks the build of ports/databases/qdbm:
>
>
> http://build-failures.rhaalovely.net/amd64-clang/2017-04-14/databases/qdbm.log
>
> Fixing the port is easy, but
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:30:43AM -0600, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> In general, if -fdo-something is supported I think it should also
> accept -fno-do-something. Since this was seen in the wild, patching
> llvm makes the most sense. Bonus points if you can get it upstreamed.
The positive forms of
In general, if -fdo-something is supported I think it should also
accept -fno-do-something. Since this was seen in the wild, patching
llvm makes the most sense. Bonus points if you can get it upstreamed.
- todd
clang already recognizes (and ignores) -fforce-addr but errors out
on -fno-force-addr. This breaks the build of ports/databases/qdbm:
http://build-failures.rhaalovely.net/amd64-clang/2017-04-14/databases/qdbm.log
Fixing the port is easy, but so is ignoring -fno-force-addr.
-fno-force-addr