From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43717) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ya5HV-0003vb-Nx for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 12:32:50 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ya5HS-0003bh-C5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 12:32:49 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:60459) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ya5HS-0003ba-4H for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 12:32:46 -0400 Message-ID: <5510402B.9050506@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 12:32:43 -0400 From: John Snow MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1426791697-17895-1-git-send-email-jsnow@redhat.com> <1426791697-17895-5-git-send-email-jsnow@redhat.com> <55102890.5070201@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 4/4] configure: Add workaround for ccache and clang List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: QEMU Developers , Stefan Hajnoczi On 03/23/2015 11:14 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 23 March 2015 at 14:52, John Snow wrote: >> On 03/23/2015 09:11 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: >>> This is really working around a bug in either ccache or >>> in the way Fedora has configured ccache, so I kind of >>> feel it ought to be dealt with there. However I don't >>> object too much to our including the workaround in our >>> configure... > >> I feel like it might be an inescapable consequence of using both ccache and >> clang together on any system, not just Fedora. > > Right, but it's not *QEMU* specific, so it would be better OK, true. > if either (a) ccache automatically enabled this if it > noticed it was being run for clang or (b) Fedora automatically > enabled this in their aliases which make 'clang' automatically > be "clang run via ccache". > > Is there a bug filed against Fedora for this? > > -- PMM > Not that I can see on the RH or ccache/LLVM bugzillas at a quick glance. I can try to file something for ccache after I look a little more carefully. In the meantime, until things improve, I think this workaround is sane if we want to deal with clang failures less. I'll clean up the other minor comments and resubmit. --js