[cfe-dev] DragonFly ToolChain Patch

[Daniel Dunbar]

Applied with a few formatting tweaks, thanks!

On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 5:32 AM, Alex Hornung <ahornung at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Daniel,
>
> When I said non-standard I just meant that it is not supported by
> upstream gcc, just by our own gcc version that ships with our base
> system (regarding -nolibc). This change was decided many years ago and
> since then we've always been shipping a gcc with that flag enabled.
>
> For easiness sake it would be great if clang could just adopt that flag
> as it doesn't clash with anything else.


Ok, this is fine with me. It doesn't hurt anyone else, although it would be
nice at some point if we had a way to document / automatically reject
options which were only useful for one platform or another.

 - Daniel


> Cheers,
> Alex
>
> On Fri, 2009-05-01 at 13:13 -0700, Daniel Dunbar wrote:
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> >
> > Thanks for the patch, I will review & get this in ASAP (but possibly
> > not till Monday).
> >
> > On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Alex Hornung <ahornung at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >         Hi,
> >
> >         the attached patch enables a DragonFly target in the clang
> >         driver,
> >         allowing us at DragonFly to use llvm/clang properly without
> >         relying
> >         heavily on gcc.
> >
> >         While so far the patch has been working, if anybody spots a
> >         mistake
> >         please say so! It will probably not be the last revision of it
> >         but
> >         nonetheless I would prefer if it could be commited upstream as
> >         it avoids
> >         having to keep a dragonfly-local patch which has to be handed
> >         to anyone
> >         using llvm/clang on df.
> >
> >         I've also added an option to Options.def (-nolibc). We rely on
> >         it at
> >         DragonFly although it is not standard. I'm not sure what the
> >         policy on
> >         this is, but I would think that it doesn't hurt comitting that
> >         upstream,
> >         too.
> >
> >
> > What do you mean by non-standard? I assume it is part of gcc on
> > DragonFly, or does DragonFly maintain a patch to add support for this?
> >
> >
> >  - Daniel
> >
> >
> >         Cheers,
> >         Alex
> >
> >
> >
> >         _______________________________________________
> >         cfe-dev mailing list
> >         cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
> >         http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
> >
> >
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20090502/2b3506e3/attachment.html>