Hello, Thanks for reply.
>why do you create a full new copy of a config, this is certainly not needed. An option in standard config file must be disable to pass compilation. I am not very familiar with how these options are used. This is the way I found. It's a little ugly indeed. I will try another way. >dude break up this patch in logic parts. this an unreadable mess. Sorry for that, I gather everything in one patch make this patch a little big. Should I send them in different parts? >I don't get why a clang patch should patch a fs!? You mean patch files in fs? This is for removing valais that clang doesn't support. Many thanks for your time. Cheers, Joseph 2015-06-04 18:21 GMT+08:00 maximilian attems <[email protected]>: > On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 04:00:18PM +0800, Joseph Lee wrote: > > > > I am working on GSOC project "bootable clang built debian" and need to > > build Linux with clang. I used patches from LLVMLinux and add a new > Kconfig > > file, modified debian/rules and debian/rules.real. May I report this as a > > bug(I attached the patch I made)? > > dude break up this patch in logic parts. this an unreadable mess. > I don't get why a clang patch should patch a fs!? >
