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
Date:	Thu, 15 Mar 2001 19:08:30 -0500
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To:	Robert Collins <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
Cc:	cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com, autoconf AT gnu DOT org
Subject:	Re: updated win32 macro
Message-ID:	<20010315190830.A7841@redhat.com>
Reply-To:	cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	Robert Collins <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>,
	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> <026501c0ada3$3942af80$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks>
Mime-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To:	<026501c0ada3$3942af80$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>; from robert.collins@itdomain.com.au on Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 09:56:43AM +1100

On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 09:56:43AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
>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"

I'm sure that the autoconf maintainers have more experience with this
than I, but IMO relying on overriding of CC and CFLAGS isn't the way to
go.  When I first started changing things, I thought I could use this
technique but I think it is too fragile.

cgf

- Raw text -