Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-dev
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
From: Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o>
Subject: About upstreams appending additional CFLAGS when building with some configure options
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 21:24:25 +0200
I won't be able to reply to this thread for now, but would like to ask
about how to handle cases like:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=381355

Until now, I usually opted to trust upstreams and don't touch FLAGS they
set (except cases like Werror and so.), but I am not sure if maybe I
should drop that CFLAGS :-/

What do you think? Please also take care I doubt upstream wouldn't ever
accept that change and, then, we should carry it forever.

Thanks a lot for your help
Attachment:
signature.asc (This is a digitally signed message part)
Replies:
Re: About upstreams appending additional CFLAGS when building with some configure options
-- Aaron W. Swenson
Re: About upstreams appending additional CFLAGS when building with some configure options
-- Michał Górny
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
[RFC] category for openoffice/libreoffice extensions
Next by thread:
Re: About upstreams appending additional CFLAGS when building with some configure options
Previous by date:
Re: [RFC] check-reqs.eclass.patch
Next by date:
[WTH] bash-completion useflag


Updated Jun 29, 2012

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-dev mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.