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: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Message-ID: <026501c0ada3$3942af80$0200a8c0@lifelesswks> From: "Robert Collins" To: Cc: , References: <035401c0ac91$3ba21fd0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks><022001c0accf$29b724d0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks><007f01c0ad2e$f3dc5d20$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks><00a301c0ad32$57ad0220$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks><00c801c0ad36$01ec3370$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks><011a01c0ad41$c0fbc9a0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <01b801c0ad4b$9b2f1380$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20010315102922 DOT B1727 AT redhat DOT com> <006c01c0ad9d$18618990$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20010315174916 DOT D6629 AT redhat DOT com> Subject: Re: updated win32 macro Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 09:56:43 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Mar 2001 22:50:59.0986 (UTC) FILETIME=[678B3F20:01C0ADA2] ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Faylor" > On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 09:12:57AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote: > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Christopher Faylor" > > > > > >> On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 11:29:34PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote: > >> >Neato.. But can we put CFLAGS="$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