On 1 May 2014 17:12, Nick Lewycky <[email protected]> wrote: > On 1 May 2014 16:58, Lubos Lunak <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Author: llunak >> Date: Thu May 1 18:58:20 2014 >> New Revision: 207814 >> >> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=207814&view=rev >> Log: >> -fsyntax-only for a test >> >> >> Modified: >> cfe/trunk/test/Frontend/rewrite-includes-messages.c >> >> Modified: cfe/trunk/test/Frontend/rewrite-includes-messages.c >> URL: >> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/Frontend/rewrite-includes-messages.c?rev=207814&r1=207813&r2=207814&view=diff >> >> ============================================================================== >> --- cfe/trunk/test/Frontend/rewrite-includes-messages.c (original) >> +++ cfe/trunk/test/Frontend/rewrite-includes-messages.c Thu May 1 >> 18:58:20 2014 >> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ >> // RUN: %clang_cc1 -E -frewrite-includes %s -I%S/Inputs/ | %clang_cc1 >> -Wall -fsyntax-only -Wunused-macros -x c - 2>&1 > %t.1 >> -// RUN: %clang_cc1 -I%S/Inputs/ -Wall -Wunused-macros %s 2>&1 > %t.2 >> +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -I%S/Inputs/ -Wall -Wunused-macros -fsyntax-only %s >> 2>&1 > %t.2 >> > > Huh? This test is running clang -cc1 which defaults to only syntax > checking unless something else is specified. -fsyntax-only isn't a -cc1 > flag, it's a clang flag. > > Please revert. >
Heh, I just saw the discussion on r207808. I understand what happened. %clang has its own set of flags and reads them, then fork+exec's %clang_cc1 with a different set of flags. The suggestion of using -fsyntax-only and updating to %clang_cc1 were mutually incompatible, just using %clang_cc1 was the right thing here. Nick
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
