svn commit: r264794 - head/release/arm

[Warner Losh]

On Apr 22, 2014, at 10:17 PM, Glen Barber <gjb at FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:15:14PM -0700, Warner Losh wrote:
>> 
>> On Apr 22, 2014, at 10:12 PM, Glen Barber <gjb at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 01:09:23AM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:02:03PM -0700, Warner Losh wrote:
>>>>> Ditto. This should be backed out and you should make whoever broke this fix it in head.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Well, this commit only moves where the definition is, from the script
>>>> itself to the configuration file.
>>>> 
>>>> But, to be fair, I think you broke it in r264660.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> To clarify further, if it was you that did break it in head/, I am not
>>> complaining about it - I fixed the use case I need.
>>> 
>>> What I *want* to happen is for the WITH_CLANG_IS_CC and
>>> WITHOUT_CLANG_IS_CC to stop conflicting with WITH_GCC, and additional
>>> convoluted and unnecessary knobs to go away.
>>> 
>>> But you already know that.  :)
>> 
>> Yea, see my recent posts to arm@ on that very topic. CLANG_IS_CC
>> is evil and must die. There’s too many stupid special cases for
>> clang in the build system, and it is really horking me off… But
>> there will be fewer in about a week or so when I push my next round
>> of fixes in...
>> 
> 
> Feel free to run your changes by me for testing.  I'm happy to
> complain^W test.  :)


Will do… My work in progress mercurial patch queue is updating every day or three
at http://people.freebsd.org/~imp/patch-queue if you wanted a sneak peak and had
a mercurial setup already… But there’s also some crazy stuff in that… When I have
a patch set I’m ready to dump into make universe, I’ll give you a heads up. And sorry
for breaking it in the first place...

Warner