On 16 August 2012 14:54, Max Horn wrote:
> On 19.07.2012, at 23:34, Joel Rosdahl wrote:
> > Max, do you have a suggestion on which options would make sense to not
> > pass to the preprocessor?
>
> Naively, any preprocessor option would be suspect, I guess. Based on the
> clang manpage, that would
Dear Joel,
sorry for the late reply -- I simply overlooked that this thread was resumed
:-(.
On 19.07.2012, at 23:34, Joel Rosdahl wrote:
> On 11 July 2012 14:42, Max Horn wrote:
>> On 11.07.2012, at 02:34, Martin Pool wrote:
>>> If you are compiling from a .i or .ii file, the -D and -I option
Lubos Lunak wrote:
On Wednesday 11 of J>>> but I think the bug originally described in<
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8460> could possibly be valid.
If you are compiling from a .i or .ii file, the -D and -I options can't
have any effect. It's reasonable for clang to emit a warning
On 11 July 2012 14:42, Max Horn wrote:
> On 11.07.2012, at 02:34, Martin Pool wrote:
>> If you are compiling from a .i or .ii file, the -D and -I options can't
>> have any effect. It's reasonable for clang to emit a warning about it, and
>> it would be reasonable for ccache to strip those options
On Wednesday 11 of July 2012, Max Horn wrote:
> On 11.07.2012, at 02:34, Martin Pool wrote:
> > On 5 July 2012 21:35, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >> On Wednesday 04 July 2012 09:53:46 Max Horn wrote:
> >> err, -I/-isystem/-D/-U/etc... are preprocessor flags and are valid when
> >> running
> >> in prep
On 11.07.2012, at 02:34, Martin Pool wrote:
> On 5 July 2012 21:35, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday 04 July 2012 09:53:46 Max Horn wrote:
>>> Using ccache with clang tends to generate tons of warnings, which can
>> range
>>> from simply being annoying, to causing autoconf failures. This
On 5 July 2012 21:35, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 July 2012 09:53:46 Max Horn wrote:
> > Using ccache with clang tends to generate tons of warnings, which can
> range
> > from simply being annoying, to causing autoconf failures. This is because
> > ccache runs the compiler with "-E" o
On Wednesday 04 July 2012 09:53:46 Max Horn wrote:
> Using ccache with clang tends to generate tons of warnings, which can range
> from simply being annoying, to causing autoconf failures. This is because
> ccache runs the compiler with "-E" on preprocessed input, but also passes
> -I, -isystem etc
Hi there,
I was wondering if anybody is looking into making ccache compatible with clang
(or perhaps vice versa, making clang compatible with ccache -- but that seems
harder to me right now). Or if somebody would be willing to look into it... I'd
be happy to help, but am not familiar with the c
