Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender:	cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID:	<026501c0ada3$3942af80$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
From:	"Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To:	<cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
Cc:	<cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>, <autoconf AT gnu DOT org>
References:	<035401c0ac91$3ba21fd0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks><022001c0accf$29b724d0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks><orelvz60mr DOT fsf AT guarana DOT lsd DOT ic DOT unicamp DOT br><007f01c0ad2e$f3dc5d20$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks><00a301c0ad32$57ad0220$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks><mv4elvz5pma DOT fsf AT nostromo DOT lrde DOT epita DOT fr><00c801c0ad36$01ec3370$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks><mv466hb5ohw DOT fsf AT nostromo DOT lrde DOT epita DOT fr><011a01c0ad41$c0fbc9a0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <mv4snkf43ot DOT fsf AT nostromo DOT lrde DOT epita DOT fr> <01b801c0ad4b$9b2f1380$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20010315102922 DOT B1727 AT redhat DOT com> <006c01c0ad9d$18618990$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20010315174916 DOT D6629 AT redhat DOT com>
Subject:	Re: updated win32 macro
Date:	Fri, 16 Mar 2001 09:56:43 +1100
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Priority:	3
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Mailer:	Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-OriginalArrivalTime:	15 Mar 2001 22:50:59.0986 (UTC) FILETIME=[678B3F20:01C0ADA2]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf AT redhat DOT com>


> On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 09:12:57AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
> >
> >
> >> On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 11:29:34PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
> >> >Neato.. But can we put CFLAGS="$WIN32FLAGS $CFLAGS" or will that
> >break
> >> >other things? AFAIK (Chris - any comment) the -mwin32 needs to go
> >> >first..
> >>
> >> It breaks builds from the gcc or gdb build trees which override
CFLAGS
> >> from the top level.  In my current tree, I've had to add additional
> >> stuff to the Makefile to get things to work.
> >>
> >> I think that setting CC=stuff will suffer from the same problem.
> >>
> >> So, I think we will have to make changes to both configure.in and
> >> Makefile.in, unfortunately.
> >
> >
> >I think that Earnie was having success building unaltered packages
with
> >CC=gcc -mwin32 ./configure ...
> >
> >I would really like to minimse the alterations needed outside of
> >configure.in - can you think of any package in particular likely to
have
> >trouble with CC=gcc -mwin32 ? (So that we could test it)
>
> Yes.  If you configure this way in the tcl directory and then cd ..,
the
> tcl directory won't build because CC is overridden by the toplevel
make.
>
> If you use CC='gcc -mwin32' configure in the top-level, then we might
> as well just get rid of -mwin32 completely.  This will cause every
> single package to be built with -mwin32 whether it needs it or not.
>
> IMO, I don't think it is a good idea to override CC anyway.  It may
> be a quick fix but it will lead to confusion if/when people say
> 'make CC=something'.
>
> cgf
>

So in a nutshell, because some packages change CFLAGS, and others change
CC, we require everyone to change their Makefiles ?

I agree that overriding CC is bad - thats why it was changed to CFLAGS.
But CFLAGS is the standard way of changing the compiler behaviour - why
do the makefiles over ride that? And how common a practice is that?

In fact, on second thought, packages that override CFLAGS just use the
low level interface
AC_PROG_CC_WIN32
EXTRA_CFLAGS="$WIN32FLAGS"

Rob

- Raw text -