<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Feb 17, 2015, at 4:09 PM, Chandler Carruth <<a href="mailto:chandlerc@google.com" class="">chandlerc@google.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class="gmail_extra"><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 3:37 PM, Anna Zaks <span dir="ltr" class=""><<a href="mailto:ganna@apple.com" target="_blank" class="">ganna@apple.com</a>></span> wrote:<br class=""><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word" class="">Unfortunately, we do rely on the Autotools to build for darwin. <div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The lack of proper testing is very unfortunate.</div></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">This isn't just "proper testing". This is any testing at all. I have to guess that you're not using it for *development*, just using it as part of some release process build system?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">If that's the case, I think it would be better for you to maintain whatever you need to support that in the interim out-of-tree. If the tests don't run, I don't think it's really reasonable to keep a build system in tree and expect open source contributors to update it and keep it working. How will they even know if it is working? We don't even have build bots that cover it as far as I know? (If we do, that somewhat lessens this pain…)</div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>We do have buildbots, e.g.:</div><div><a href="http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/view/Clang/job/clang-stage1-configure-RA_build/" class="">http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/view/Clang/job/clang-stage1-configure-RA_build/</a></div><div><br class=""></div><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word" class=""><div class=""> In the future, we will either drop the dependency on Makefile/autoconf build or add the support for sanitizer testing.</div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div><div class="gmail_extra">Given the push to move away from autotools altogether, it would seem really weird to add support for testing to it rather than migrating the dependency away. You can even use the cmake build *from* an autoconf/Makefile setup by running cmake directly. It's a bit annoying, but it can be done.</div></div></div></blockquote><br class=""></div><div>There are still a lot of issues blocking full CMake equivalence with autoconf/Makefile (PR15732). Removing the ASan makefile support is really premature.</div></body></html>