From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: dunlap@ucar.edu (Rocky Dunlap) Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2020 10:05:07 -0600 Subject: [lttng-dev] Babeltrace2 - compilation error with intel18 In-Reply-To: <1c4447ea-b67a-eaf0-c9dd-d2c10106b5a7@simark.ca> References: <60fcd0f0-e89c-5e04-8185-8cf34a92fe04@simark.ca> <4bc0ec69-7587-fe58-691f-5cb23a11cd43@simark.ca> <1c4447ea-b67a-eaf0-c9dd-d2c10106b5a7@simark.ca> Message-ID: Simon, Yes, I will be happy to give this a try. What's the easiest way to get this patch? (Sorry, I'm less familiar with Gerrit...) Rocky On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 9:44 AM Simon Marchi wrote: > On 2020-03-20 11:12 p.m., Simon Marchi via lttng-dev wrote: > > So since distutils really wants to compile the Python native modules > using all the same > > flags as the Python interpreter was built with, I presume that they > really assume that > > you'll be using the exact same toolchain to build your module as was > used to build the > > interpreter. Maybe we could just not pass CC/CFLAGS when building the > Python module, > > so it will simply be built with the same compiler/linker as Python was > built with, and > > we'll avoid all these problems... > > If we want to go this route, here's a patch that implements it. > > https://review.lttng.org/c/babeltrace/+/3257 > > This makes it so we don't override the compiler or flags (other than > necessary includes > flags) when building the native module. So when configuring with > CC=clang, the Python > native module gets built with the Python distribution's default compiler, > with just the > flags it wants. > > Could you check if that works with CC=icc as well? > > Simon > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: