[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 19:35:18 +0200
From: Shiz <hi@...z.me>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] add musl-clang, a wrapper for system clang installs
> On 29 May 2015, at 19:13, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 07:11:18PM +0200, Shiz wrote:
>
> 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
This isn’t a bad idea, but it modifies the behaviour in the same way
musl-clang does, except the other way around: it will not have clang
invoke ld if only -l is supplied by the user and no object paths are,
which is what normally should happen.
I’m pretty sure I’ve devised a fix that doesn’t modify behaviour and
makes ld.musl-clang a bit cleaner as a side-effect - I’ll post an updated
patch after a bit of testing.
-S
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (802 bytes)
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.
