On 11/13/19 5:19 AM, Kyle Evans wrote: > On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 3:29 PM John Baldwin <j...@freebsd.org> wrote: >> >> Author: jhb >> Date: Tue Nov 12 21:29:52 2019 >> New Revision: 354661 >> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/354661 >> >> Log: >> Force MK_CLANG_IS_CC on in XMAKE. >> >> This ensures that a bootstrap clang compiler is always installed as cc >> in WORLDTMP. If it is only installed as 'clang' then /usr/bin/cc is >> used during the build instead of the bootstrap compiler. >> >> Reviewed by: imp >> MFC after: 1 month >> Sponsored by: DARPA >> Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D22332 >> >> Modified: >> head/Makefile.inc1 >> >> Modified: head/Makefile.inc1 >> ============================================================================== >> --- head/Makefile.inc1 Tue Nov 12 21:26:50 2019 (r354660) >> +++ head/Makefile.inc1 Tue Nov 12 21:29:52 2019 (r354661) >> @@ -734,6 +734,7 @@ TMAKE= \ >> # TOOLS_PREFIX set in BMAKE >> XMAKE= ${BMAKE} \ >> TARGET=${TARGET} TARGET_ARCH=${TARGET_ARCH} \ >> + MK_CLANG_IS_CC=yes \ >> MK_GDB=no MK_TESTS=no >> >> # kernel-tools stage > > This sounds wrong for any arch not currently supported by in-tree > clang, and CI for those archs have been failing about since here: > https://ci.freebsd.org/tinderbox/
It shouldn't be wrong because during XMAKE, MK_CLANG is only set to yes if MK_CLANG_BOOTSTRAP is set to yes, and MK_CLANG_IS_CC only does anything in the clang Makefile which is only recursed into if MK_CLANG is yes. Sigh, I see it now. It's because we _don't_ have MK_GCC_IS_CC but instead check MK_CLANG_IS_CC for "no" in gnu/usr.bin/cc/*/Makefile. I'll come up with a fix. -- John Baldwin _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
