From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 20 03:19:38 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 369A61065694; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 03:19:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from das@freebsd.org) Received: from zim.MIT.EDU (ZIM.MIT.EDU [18.95.3.101]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDDD78FC15; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 03:19:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from zim.MIT.EDU (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zim.MIT.EDU (8.14.3/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o8K2jggc025761; Sun, 19 Sep 2010 22:45:42 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from das@freebsd.org) Received: (from das@localhost) by zim.MIT.EDU (8.14.3/8.14.2/Submit) id o8K2jg9u025760; Sun, 19 Sep 2010 22:45:42 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from das@freebsd.org) Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2010 22:45:42 -0400 From: David Schultz To: David Xu Message-ID: <20100920024542.GA25717@zim.MIT.EDU> Mail-Followup-To: David Xu , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, Marcel Moolenaar , Bruce Evans References: <4C972E83.7090603@freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C972E83.7090603@freebsd.org> Cc: Marcel Moolenaar , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Per-source CFLAGS again X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 03:19:38 -0000 The reason I proposed the feature was so that we could compile the parts of libc that come from a third party (namely, gdtoa) with different warning flags than the rest of libc. It was not committed because someone else proposed a simpler way to get make to use different flags for gdtoa. I suppose it wouldn't hurt to commit it it's needed for something else, but I think Marcel also had some philosophical objections to the proposal. On Mon, Sep 20, 2010, David Xu wrote: > I found a topic about per-source CFLAGS, > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/2003-June/000906.html > > and it seems the patch was never committed, why ? > I feel it is useful because I want to compile those files which > have cancellation points with compiler flag -fexceptions, for example, > POSIX semaphore cancellation point in libc must be compiled with > -fexceptions to support stack unwinding. > > Regards, > David Xu