[Mesa-dev] [PATCHES] clang compatibility

[José Fonseca]

On Sun, 2010-08-22 at 02:35 -0700, nobled wrote:
> The first three attached patches make it possible to compile Mesa with
> LLVM/Clang:
> 1. Add -lstdc++ when linking glsl_compiler and glcpp
> 2. Move -lstdc++ from the Gallium-specific Makefile.dri to
> DRI_LIB_DEPS in configure (fixes linking classic Mesa drivers)
> 3. Since autoconf gives GCC=yes even when using clang (since it just
> tests for the __GNUC__ macro), don't check for a minimum version of
> 3.3 if $(CC) points to a clang executable. (unfortunately I'm not sure
> how to properly detect clang, short of test-compiling a file that
> contains #ifdef __clang__. I.e. if $(CC) = 'cc', and 'cc' is an
> alternatives symlink to llvm-clang, this doesn't detect that case.)
> 
> The rest are just fixes to compiler warnings:
> 4. dri: Fix implicit declaration
> 5. program: Fix struct/class confusion
> 6. dr/radeon: Fix printf format
> 7. llvmpipe: Fix memory leak
> 
> With the first three patches, I can compile Mesa with clang 2.7 in
> Ubuntu Lucid if I export three variables before configure:
> export CC=llvm-clang
> export CXX=llvm-clang
> export CPPFLAGS=/usr/lib/clang/1.1/include
> ./configure
> (Yeah, the third one is really prone to breakage with new versions and
> I'm still trying to figure out how to not need it; it should also get
> passed as part of MKDEP_OPTIONS in configure.ac, TBH.)

The llvmpipe patch looks correct to me, as draw_destroy doesn't destroy
vbuf.

But if so then interface looks bad to me -- what's the point of putting
a destroy callback in the interface if it's never used by the other side
of the interface? Perhaps Keith can make a call of what's the right
thing to do here.

Jose