From owner-freebsd-multimedia@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Sep 18 16:07:52 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-multimedia@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A7CF1065675;
	Sun, 18 Sep 2011 16:07:52 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from bf1783@googlemail.com)
Received: from mail-wy0-f178.google.com (mail-wy0-f178.google.com
	[74.125.82.178])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C60A48FC1E;
	Sun, 18 Sep 2011 16:07:51 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wyf23 with SMTP id 23so5611879wyf.37
	for <multiple recipients>; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 09:07:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=googlemail.com; s=gamma;
	h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id
	:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
	bh=zghEt5OChX80SjVHffRjFRuDKGqRkoLgxbQax60pcXc=;
	b=vArBxoOZihwcQDlRdPbX3Oioo31LPNTgUCWUKNyUPoMe2rt7+iTjWKAK+5lQLKStkB
	hQ3ikQX/sNHW/UnVC9vbeP7GCUvndGxV+8nlqUORd8B18V7MiaqdI4/SdO+aopjPkS64
	em7nNpvtcrtAwTwZSBo1feqPdV6mGvSEbSKbw=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.227.11.81 with SMTP id s17mr1689203wbs.62.1316362070592; Sun,
	18 Sep 2011 09:07:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.180.100.1 with HTTP; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 09:07:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20110918152101.GA88715@triton8.kn-bremen.de>
References: <CAGFTUwNMqpOcYLZCzbZ7tj5qqZF6UXm6zv-+H3ZxYNa9U9VQCA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110918152101.GA88715@triton8.kn-bremen.de>
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 12:07:50 -0400
Message-ID: <CAGFTUwObv-92bVdF+7YZ7Xdf-gTp-_0N-MOQfq=S_y=40PDApQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: "b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com>
To: Juergen Lock <nox@jelal.kn-bremen.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org, gerald@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Has anyone tested the jack update - am I ok to commit it?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: bf1783@gmail.com
List-Id: Multimedia discussions <freebsd-multimedia.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-multimedia>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-multimedia-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-multimedia>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-multimedia-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-multimedia>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-multimedia-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 16:07:52 -0000

On 9/18/11, Juergen Lock <nox@jelal.kn-bremen.de> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 10:19:27PM -0400, b. f. wrote:

>> -- clean up ugly flag handling
>>
>  Can you elaborate?

As in the patch I sent to you, along with the doxygen-related changes.
 CFLAGS and CPPFLAGS are already being passed in do-configure, so it
is only necessary to append to them, but not to explicitly add them to
CONFIGURE_ENV.  This also makes it easier to check their values via
"make -V".  Also, it was always advisable to perform linking via the
compiler with the flags issued for compilation, and now it is
essential for flags like -flto and -fstack-protector, which some
people are using with ports, so our previous careless handling of
LDFLAGS is being cleaned up (cf.
http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/157936, etc.) , and
it is important to try (within reason) to honor the user-requested
LDFLAGS just as we do for CFLAGS.  Therefore, just append the addition
to the library search path to LDFLAGS, and pass the result, rather
than clobbering the flags.

b.