From owner-freebsd-current Mon Jan 10 9: 6:48 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mout1.01019freenet.de (mout1.01019freenet.de [62.104.201.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CE2314FE9 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2000 09:06:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from netchild@leidinger.net) Received: from [62.104.201.2] (helo=mx1.01019freenet.de) by mout1.01019freenet.de with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #2) id 127iHB-0008PK-00; Mon, 10 Jan 2000 18:06:41 +0100 Received: from [213.6.53.222] (helo=Magelan.Leidinger.net) by mx1.01019freenet.de with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #2) id 127iHA-0006V6-00; Mon, 10 Jan 2000 18:06:40 +0100 Received: from Leidinger.net (netchild@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Magelan.Leidinger.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA04920; Mon, 10 Jan 2000 18:00:53 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from netchild@Leidinger.net) Message-Id: <200001101700.SAA04920@Magelan.Leidinger.net> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 18:00:52 +0100 (CET) From: Alexander Leidinger Subject: Re: __sigisempty() undefined if "cc -g" used. To: bde@zeta.org.au Cc: jdp@polstra.com, current@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by Magelan.Leidinger.net id SAA04920 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 11 Jan, Bruce Evans wrote: >> Didn=B4t we have "makeoptions DEBUG=3D-g" as a kernel option to compil= e the >> kernel with debug information? What about "config -g MYKERNEL"? >=20 > DEBUG is a private variable in kernel Makefiles. "config -g MYKERNEL" If I set DEBUG in make.conf it should work, right? So what's private about it? > is the only correct way to set it. "makeoptions DEBUG=3D-g" is a hacki= sh > way to set it. It depends on knowing the the Makefiles' internals. > >> Do we really need a global debug option which covers everything? >=20 > It's simpler to have the same global debug option for everything. We have CFLAGS (userland) and COPTFLAGS (kernel) in make.conf, shouldn=B4= t we also have e.g. DEBUG_FLAGS and DEBUG_KERNEL (renamed DEBUG from above)? Together with CFLAGS and COPTFLAGS it would make more sense, IMO. And what about those people who want to compile only the kernel and the KLD's with debug information, but not the userland? >> If I read it correcly we have DEBUG_FLAGS for the userland (if it uses= a >> bsd.{prog,lib}.mk) and DEBUG for the kernel (and COPTS for KLD's), >> right? >=20 > No. DEBUG is quite different. Sorry, but I didn=B4t get the point. Is it a semantic difference or a technical one? >> So we only have to make the KLD's consistent to the kernel (or am >> I missing something): >> >> bsd.kmod.mk: >> ---snip--- >> 92c92 >> < CFLAGS+=3D ${COPTS} -D_KERNEL ${CWARNFLAGS} >> --- >> > CFLAGS+=3D ${DEBUG} -D_KERNEL ${CWARNFLAGS} >> ---snip--- >=20 > This would break COPTS :-). All places should use something more like: > > CFLAGS+=3D [-D_KERNEL] ${CWARNFLAGS} ${COPTS} ${DEBUG_FLAGS} What about renaming "DEBUG" in the kernel makefile to DEBUG_KERNEL and use DEBUG_KERNEL instead of DEBUG_FLAGS in bsd.kmod.mk? Bye, Alexander. --=20 Happy new year and no Y2K-crash to everyone. http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander+Home @ Leidinger.net Key fingerprint =3D 7423 F3E6 3A7E B334 A9CC B10A 1F5F 130A A638 6E7E To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message