On 02/14/2018 08:22 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
It uses both. In this case it uses clang because it has to build a
clang extension (as well as a gcc extension).
Isn't Clang compiled with GCC, too? (At least in the past, we didn't
bootstrap it.) Why is Clang required to build the
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 02:27:02PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 02/13/2018 11:36 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> >redhat-rpm-config flags have usually been compatible with both gcc and
> >clang, so if there's no newer clang that supports this, it feels like
> >we've a few options
> >
> > 1.
On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:03:28AM -0800, Tom Stellard wrote:
> On 02/13/2018 02:18 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >
> > My build of american-fuzzy-lop fails because clang doesn't
> > understand the ‘-mcet -fcf-protection’ flags which seem to be
> > added by RPM.
> >
>
> Is there a particular
On 02/13/2018 02:18 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> My build of american-fuzzy-lop fails because clang doesn't
> understand the ‘-mcet -fcf-protection’ flags which seem to be
> added by RPM.
>
Is there a particular reason this packages uses clang and not gcc?
-Tom
> clang -O2 -g -pipe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Tue, 2018-02-13 at 10:36 +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 10:18:05AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >
> > My build of american-fuzzy-lop fails because clang doesn't
> > understand the ‘-mcet -fcf-protection’ flags
On Tuesday, 13 February 2018 at 14:27, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 02/13/2018 11:36 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > redhat-rpm-config flags have usually been compatible with both gcc and
> > clang, so if there's no newer clang that supports this, it feels like
> > we've a few options
> >
> >
On 02/13/2018 11:36 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
redhat-rpm-config flags have usually been compatible with both gcc and
clang, so if there's no newer clang that supports this, it feels like
we've a few options
1. Have the RPM spec for apps using clang filter these flags out of
the RPM
On 02/13/2018 11:46 AM, Tom Hughes wrote:
Given that -mcet seems to turn on extra instructions is this not an
issue for compatibility with older processors? or are they sequences
which decode as no-ops on older processors?
They are NOPs on all current CPUs. They trap on some older CPUs, but
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 10:46:37AM +, Tom Hughes wrote:
> Given that -mcet seems to turn on extra instructions is this not an
> issue for compatibility with older processors? or are they sequences
> which decode as no-ops on older processors?
On 13/02/18 10:36, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 10:18:05AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
My build of american-fuzzy-lop fails because clang doesn't
understand the ‘-mcet -fcf-protection’ flags which seem to be
added by RPM.
clang -O2 -g -pipe -Wall
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 10:18:05AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> My build of american-fuzzy-lop fails because clang doesn't
> understand the ‘-mcet -fcf-protection’ flags which seem to be
> added by RPM.
>
> clang -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
>
11 matches
Mail list logo
