Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Sam James <sam@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: James Beddek <telans@××××××.de>, Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@g.o>, Manoj Gupta <manojgupta@××××××××.org>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH v3] kernel-2.eclass: Respect portage toolchain variables
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2022 23:25:50
Message-Id: 4CC4B716-65A7-44C0-B7F0-D3C4E5E42C2F@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH v3] kernel-2.eclass: Respect portage toolchain variables by Mike Gilbert
1 > On 3 Jan 2022, at 18:23, Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o> wrote:
2 > On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 12:49 PM Adrian Ratiu <adrian.ratiu@×××××××××.com <mailto:adrian.ratiu@×××××××××.com>> wrote:
3 >>
4 >> Starting with kernel>=v5.7 the build system can override the
5 >> tools vars by setting LLVM=1 [1], but older kernels still use
6 >> the default GNU tools, so to be able to use a full LLVM/Clang
7 >> build, CC & co should be set to their respective portage values.
8 >>
9 >> [1] a0d1c951ef08 kbuild: support LLVM=1 to switch the default tools to Clang/LLVM
10 >>
11 >> Co-authored-by: Manoj Gupta <manojgupta@××××××××.org>
12 >> Signed-off-by: Adrian Ratiu <adrian.ratiu@×××××××××.com>
13 >> [snip]
14 >
15 > This seems ok to me, at least given the way the eclass currently works.
16 >
17 > At some point, we should really convert xmakeopts into an array. Any
18 > of these variables might contain spaces, and that would break the
19 > current implementation.
20
21
22 agreed, but lgtm

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies