8 Mar
2022
8 Mar
'22
4:36 p.m.
On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 11:08:29AM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
+``LLVM=0`` is not the same as omitting ``LLVM`` altogether, it will behave like +``LLVM=1``.
Hmm... I can see someone's build wrappers setting LLVM=1, then them being surprised that appending LLVM=0 doesn't disable LLVM=1 as they might expect. But Masahiro says let's fix this later which is fine.
What happens if you say LLVM= instead of LLVM=0 ? Would that "undo" a prior LLVM=1 and use GCC instead?