Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 13:13:35 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] add musl-clang, a wrapper for system clang installs On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 07:11:18PM +0200, Shiz wrote: > > On 29 May 2015, at 19:03, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote: > > > > This logic looks wrong. For example, "-L foo" would result in input=1, > > no? And same for any other options with arguments. > > > > Rich > > Hmm, I’m afraid you’re right. I’ll need to rethink this approach... > I was slightly annoyed by it being needed in the first place, but there’s no > other way from what I could see than these markers to figure out what comes > from a user and what doesn’t, since clang re-orders -l and -L arguments. > If they weren’t needed I could just move -lc to the linker wrapper... What if you add a bogus prefix to all -l and -L options provided by the user? Then the wrapper can remove any -l or -L options without the prefix, then remove the prefix from the ones that remain. Rich
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.