Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 12:18:45 +0100 From: Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: clang -faddress-sanitizer vs. -fsanitize=address (was: new clang 3.2 warnings) On 01/20/2013 11:00 AM, magnum wrote: > On 20 Jan, 2013, at 10:55 , magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote: >> On 20 Jan, 2013, at 10:38 , Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com> wrote: >>> clang: warning: argument unused during compilation: '-faddress-sanitizer' [...] >>> But when I change the option name in Makefile, I get >>> clang: warning: argument unused during compilation: '-fsanitize=address' >>> instead, for 2.9 and for 3.1. >>> >>> This is bad. May be HAVE_CLANG_3_2 is a good enough solution right now? >>> How widespread is clang 3.2? Fedora 18 still uses 3.1. >> >> Bull's clang is 3.0-6ubuntu3. It doesn't seem to understand either of the variants. > > No, wait. The message "argument unused during compilation" just tells us that option should be in LDFLAGS only, not CFLAGS. So Bull's clang does support -fsanitize-address. I'll commit a patch. According to http://clang.llvm.org/docs/AddressSanitizer.html, the -fsanitize=address option has to be used for compilation and for linking. May be clang 2.9 and 3.0 just don't support -faddress-sanitizer correctly. The renaming of -faddress-sanitizer to -fsanitize=address for clang versions >= 3.2 seems to be a separate issue. Frank
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.