[Openmp-commits] [Openmp-dev] Large Refactor of CMake build system

[C Bergström]

> I don't believe that your problem is imaginary, but we also need to be able to reproduce it, or have a patch fixing it with some explanation of what's going on. Regardless, it is really important for the LLVM community to move forward with the new build system. We certainly have a release-candidate process, and the purpose of this process is to isolate and correct bugs. In that sense, the system is working as intended. The new CMake build system is in line with LLVM's general best practices, and the community has demanded that as a prerequisite for moving forward with integration with Clang. As a result, we really do need to get user feedback on this build system as opposed to any other.
>
>  -Hal

Ok - so standalone user hitting a critical blocking issue isn't
important enough feedback to consider this a blocker.

I didn't say revert the whole thing - I said leave it out of the
"STABLE" 3.7 branch.
-----------
Everyone here is totally cool with this difficult to reproduce bug
that was introduced in the stable branch at the last minute. (Actually
days after the tagged release)

If that's the way this project will work well then I guess my feedback
and effort isn't worth shit. It would be far less effort for us to
fork than waste my time and yours.

We don't hit this issue in any other project (libc++, compiler-rt or
others). So clearly the openmp cmake is doing something different from
those.
--------
To stop wasting time on this - I see the following options and I let
Hans or someone else in a leadership position decide

1) We fork off - going forward I will have nothing to do with this project

2) revert the offending changes in the 3.7 release branch (preferred)

3) introduce a fix asap (unlikely since the root problem hasn't been identified)

4) Introduce #if PathScale logic in the cmake files to avoid setting
any flags when our compiler it detected. (2nd preference) The patch
for this should be trivial and if things are designed correctly should
take less time than the average email in this thread. I see there's
logic for Intel compiler and others already. I don't like the
spaghetti mess, but c'est la vie