On Sat, Mar 5, 2022 at 3:15 AM Nathan Chancellor nathan@kernel.org wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 10:09:03AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 10:08:14AM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
[...]
Update and reorder the documentation to reflect these new additions. At the same time, notate that LLVM=0 is not the same as just omitting it altogether, which has confused people in the past.
Is it worth making LLVM=0 actually act the way it's expected to?
I don't really see the point, omitting $(LLVM) altogether is simpler. Why specify LLVM=0 if you want GNU tools, since it is the default? However, I can look into changing that in a new revision or a follow up if others disagree?
Changing the meaning of LLVM=0 is beyond the scope of what we are trying to achieve now.
I think documenting it is enough.
(If we have a good reason to change it, we can. But, it should be done in a separate patch, at least)