[igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] ci: build with Clang

[Ville Syrjälä]

On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 03:49:49PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 01:05:28PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > On Thu, 25 Apr 2019, Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 07:15:26PM +0300, Simon Ser wrote:
> > >> This adds a build step with Clang on Fedora. Hopefully this can help keeping
> > >> Clang builds healthy.
> > >> 
> > >> Signed-off-by: Simon Ser <simon.ser at intel.com>
> > >> ---
> > >>  .gitlab-ci.yml | 8 ++++++++
> > >>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> > >> 
> > >> diff --git a/.gitlab-ci.yml b/.gitlab-ci.yml
> > >> index ae8cbb67..e7d31376 100644
> > >> --- a/.gitlab-ci.yml
> > >> +++ b/.gitlab-ci.yml
> > >> @@ -47,6 +47,14 @@ build:tests-fedora-oldest-meson:
> > >>      - ninja -C build
> > >>      - ninja -C build igt-gpu-tools-doc
> > >>  
> > >> +build:tests-fedora-clang:
> > >> +  stage: build
> > >> +  script:
> > >> +    - dnf install -y clang
> > >> +    - export CC=clang
> > >> +    - meson $MESON_OPTIONS build
> > >> +    - ninja -C build
> > >
> > > Uh why?
> > >
> > > The thing that broken is building on non-x86 hosts, and that's the thing
> > > gitlab CI caught. I have no idea why this is all about clang (imo it's
> > > not), and I don't think we should care about clang either.
> > 
> > And why shouldn't we care about clang?
> 
> What I meant is: We already have gitlab ci targets that caught the recent
> clang regression (because a lot more broke). No one gave a shit from what
> I can tell, so I guess I'm questioning the value of more gitlab CI targets
> in general.

Has the gitlab ci stuff been fixed so it doesn't fail 100% of time
anyway? At least I've already been fully conditioned to ignore all
gitlab errors because of that.

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel