1 |
2016-06-30 23:50 GMT+08:00 Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o>: |
2 |
> On 30/06/16 17:40, Lei Zhang wrote: |
3 |
>> I also noticed that gcc's sanitizer doesn't work on the musl based |
4 |
>> system, so is it forgivable to not support clang's sanitizer either? |
5 |
>> (clang's sanitizer is implemented in compiler-rt) |
6 |
> |
7 |
> package mask the useflag for now, it is less important. |
8 |
> |
9 |
> Make sure to open a bug about it on llvm and gcc. |
10 |
|
11 |
compiler-rt's sanitizer uses some non-POSIX features like <obstack.h>; |
12 |
I guess gcc's situation is similar. It's not necessarily a bug though. |
13 |
|
14 |
Actually compiler-rt uses stuff like "#if __linux__ && !__ANDROID__" |
15 |
to protect code that uses GNU extensions. The fix is simple: replace |
16 |
it with "#ifdef __GLIBC__". But I'm not sure if this fix has unwanted |
17 |
impact on other libc like uclibc. It looks uclibc supports certain GNU |
18 |
extensions that are absent in musl, like <obstack.h>. |
19 |
|
20 |
|
21 |
Lei |