From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bruce Richardson Subject: Re: clang build failing in v2.0.0 from poisoned symbols Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 11:15:31 +0100 Message-ID: <20150619101531.GC6880@bricha3-MOBL3> References: <20150619033746.GA24292@mhcomputing.net> <20150619043102.GA25396@mhcomputing.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: Matthew Hall Return-path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85AADC73A for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 12:15:35 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150619043102.GA25396@mhcomputing.net> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 09:31:02PM -0700, Matthew Hall wrote: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 08:37:46PM -0700, Matthew Hall wrote: > > dpdk/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h:68:20: error: poisoning existing macro [-Werror] > > Hi all, > > I finally figured out what happened. My older DPDK build configuration file > had defined the poisoned macros to try to enable the features they used to > cover, which had been obsoleted and/or replaced. > > I am happy to be able to report that my app compiled with no changes once I > rebased my locally tweaked DPDK onto the v2.0.0 tag... very impressive work... > we might not be binary compatible but we definitely seem to be source > compatible for my app at least. Considering most people use the static library > this is not a bad state to start with I'd say. > > Matthew. Thank you. It's finally nice to get some good news about compatibility! :-)