Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 07:54:15 +0500 (MVT) From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com> To: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: WITH_GCC Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1205210751180.6769@zbenl.fvgr> In-Reply-To: <4FB34182.20605@FreeBSD.org> References: <CAGFTUwPUFdP=Z20%2BbL59qFuh_V6R1R-GcyrK03dxESL6ZyGz7A@mail.gmail.com> <4F578AA7.4060008@FreeBSD.org> <4F990D9A.3090100@FreeBSD.org> <4FA643FA.3050206@FreeBSD.org> <4FAB6E01.50108@FreeBSD.org> <4FAC3084.80101@FreeBSD.org> <alpine.LNX.2.00.1205160324510.2599@zbenl.fvgr> <4FB34182.20605@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 16 May 2012, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>>> +CFLAGS+= ${CFLAGS.${CC}}
>>> +CXXFLAGS+= ${CXXFLAGS.${CC}}
>>
>> Similarly here. Where does this come from, why is it related to
>> the WITH_GCC versus USE_GCC patch? Can and should this be split
>> out? How is it used and where? Where is it defined?
>
> This should be split out. The use case is to make it possible to set
> something like the following in make.conf:
>
> CFLAGS.gcc46+= -fearlier-gcc-fails-with-this-flag-but-I-want-it-with-gcc46
I see! The only question I have is whether, given there is also clang,
this is really best suited for Mk/bsd.gcc.mk, or this should rather
become part of the general Mk/bsd.port.mk?
To me it looks more like the latter, Mk/bsd.port.mk, but if not for
some reason, please add a comment to the top of the file Mk/bsd.gcc.mk
and commit this part.
Gerald
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.LNX.2.00.1205210751180.6769>