Mixing CC and a different CLANG seems like a bad idea

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, mikael(dot)kjellstrom(at)gmail(dot)com
Subject: Mixing CC and a different CLANG seems like a bad idea
Date: 2021-11-18 16:56:59
Message-ID: 2921539.1637254619@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I noticed that, a week after Michael pushed 9ff47ea41 to silence
-Wcompound-token-split-by-macro warnings, buildfarm member sidewinder
is still spewing them. Investigation shows that it's building with

configure: using compiler=cc (nb4 20200810) 7.5.0
configure: using CLANG=ccache clang

and the system cc doesn't know -Wcompound-token-split-by-macro,
so we don't use it, but the modules that are built into bytecode
still produce the warnings because they're built with clang.

I think this idea of using clang with switches selected for some other
compiler is completely horrid, and needs to be nuked from orbit before
it causes problems worse than mere warnings. Why did we not simply
insist that if you want to use --with-llvm, the selected compiler must
be clang? I cannot see any benefit of mix-and-match here.

regards, tom lane

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2021-11-18 17:08:18 Re: Should rename "startup process" to something else?
Previous Message Justin Pryzby 2021-11-18 16:22:44 Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes