1) oh... no need to get into llvm and to make a patch... how convenient.
2) no, cmake is a c++ pile of steaming cr*p, period.
3) why do you think I am into llvm code? I am going to stare at this
on-going sabotage and do nothing?
4) only gcc can build linux... for now. But clang/llvm work paves the
On 2018-12-24 21:11, Cág wrote:
Hi,
This is long and rather off-topic (and a bit of ranting is included, as
always).
I have to use EL7/Fedora almost daily and Ubuntu once every week or
two.
As you might know, they have this GNOME/systemd/etc. thing. I'm
already
kinda used to GNOME freezing,
Sylvain Bertrand wrote:
???
clang/llvm is a c++ abomination: a massive pile of c++ cr*p. If you
dislike the GNU make, wait to read the c++ code of cmake, the build
system of clang/llvm, not to mention ninja (something in the horrible
python3 or python2). I am into llvm code right now, and I feel
???
clang/llvm is a c++ abomination: a massive pile of c++ cr*p. If you
dislike the GNU make, wait to read the c++ code of cmake, the build
system of clang/llvm, not to mention ninja (something in the horrible
python3 or python2). I am into llvm code right now, and I feel like
working in an asylum:
Sean MacLennan wrote:
Wrong. Not even you can compile it with Clang, (HOSTCC=clang
CC=clang), but link it with lld:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-January/109288.html
Sorry, I should have said you can't compile a *working* kernel with
clang. They are close though, and I believe t
On Tue, 25 Dec 2018 12:31:50 -0600
Cág wrote:
> Wrong. Not even you can compile it with Clang, (HOSTCC=clang
> CC=clang), but link it with lld:
> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-January/109288.html
Sorry, I should have said you can't compile a *working* kernel with
clang. They are
Sean MacLennan wrote:
I'm thinking of something you can compile the Linux kernel[0] with.
The Linux kernel only compiles with the GNU toolchain. There are
efforts to get it compiling with clang but I believe they are not there
yet.
Wrong. Not even you can compile it with Clang, (HOSTCC=clang C
Stephen Turner wrote:
Toybox?
I haven’t followed the project in a bit, I really should check in and
see what they have finished but I know that project aimed to get most
if not all of a build environment recreated in a portable form so if
you haven’t seen it then I recommend it.
If I may ask, wh
> On Dec 25, 2018, at 12:22 PM, Sean MacLennan wrote:
>
> On Tue, 25 Dec 2018 08:16:47 -0600
> Cág wrote:
>
>> I'm thinking of something you can compile the Linux kernel[0] with.
>
> The Linux kernel only compiles with the GNU toolchain. There are
> efforts to get it compiling with clang bu
On Tue, 25 Dec 2018 08:16:47 -0600
Cág wrote:
> I'm thinking of something you can compile the Linux kernel[0] with.
The Linux kernel only compiles with the GNU toolchain. There are
efforts to get it compiling with clang but I believe they are not there
yet.
The Linux kernel is portability becau
> On Dec 25, 2018, at 9:16 AM, Cág wrote:
>
> Jan Bessai wrote:
>> Not sure if it has any advantages for you, but you might try bmake
>> https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/bmake
>> It is a port of the Netbsd make.
>
> bmake has its own conditionals like .if, .ifdef, .else, etc., i.e.
Jan Bessai wrote:
Not sure if it has any advantages for you, but you might try bmake
https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/bmake
It is a port of the Netbsd make.
bmake has its own conditionals like .if, .ifdef, .else, etc., i.e.
it is itself incompatible with GNU make. I'm thinking of som
12 matches
Mail list logo
