Am 11.03.2009 11:52, schrieb Carl-Daniel Hailfinger:
All of them: Signed-off-by: Patrick Georgi patrick.georgi@coresystems.de
AFAICS --scan-build and --nostackprotect can be specified at the same time, interacting badly.
That's possible. The nostackprotect change happens to enable nostackprotect with crosscompilers (without it, the crosscompiler test overwrites CC)
In the code, first -fno-stack-protector gets added, then it's pushed into the wrapper script (also necessary for "gcc -m32"), as scan-build doesn't like CC="gcc -arguments". That really looks like it's doing the right thing. I tried a build right now, and it seems to work. (but on that system, nostackprotect doesn't fix otherwise broken builds)
Should we name the parameter "scan-build" or "scanbuild"?
I chose scan-build because that's what the tool is called. On the other hand, --nostackprotect strips the "-", too. I honestly have no opinion on that :-)
If the two points above are resolved, the whole patchset is Acked-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net
Thanks. I'll wait a bit for more opinions on the parameter name, but as the short name stays stable, changing the long version later-on shouldn't be too much of a problem.
Regards, Patrick