Hi Ben, thanks for your investigations. Should I ask on the LLVM mailing list whether they can answer the open questions? Or does anyone on this mailing list have any related knowledge?
Bye Christoph > Hmm. I don't see anything in the docs which states that uname must > always have non-NULL in 'release'. Maybe clang is using extra > information from the implementation of uname (which may be a macro)? > > It is under a __linux defined block, so maybe if uname was guaranteed to > be non-NULL for Linux at least, it'd be acceptable IMO. > > --Ben -- Powered by www.kitware.com Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Kitware offers various services to support the CMake community. For more information on each offering, please visit: CMake Support: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/support.html CMake Consulting: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/consulting.html CMake Training Courses: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/training.html Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
