xtexChooser wrote:
Ahhh wait, if the original path is also printed, Make may see them as broken. I
don't know what to do now, oops.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/117458
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.
xtexChooser wrote:
what you said is also a problem. maybe we should print both raw path and
resolved path?
If the path is not resolved, Make and Ninja will canonicalize these paths
without resolving directory symbolic-links in the path, which may lead to a
broken path.
As the example I have g
kadircet wrote:
It's hard to say what's the right/wrong behavior when it comes to symlink
handling, but I am having a hard time understanding what kind of applications
can benefit from this new behavior. AFAICT most workflows that involve
dependency files use it for "caching" purposes, and som
github-actions[bot] wrote:
@xtexChooser Congratulations on having your first Pull Request (PR) merged into
the LLVM Project!
Your changes will be combined with recent changes from other authors, then
tested by our [build bots](https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/). If there is a
problem with a bu
https://github.com/MaskRay closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/117458
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
xtexChooser wrote:
Done
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/117458
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/xtexChooser edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/117458
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
