1 |
Dnia 2014-01-09, o godz. 18:59:26 |
2 |
Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> napisał(a): |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina |
5 |
> <zerochaos@g.o> wrote: |
6 |
> > I never felt manipulating cflags with use flags was a great idea, but in |
7 |
> > this case is does feel extra pointless. |
8 |
> > |
9 |
> |
10 |
> Tend to agree, though one place I could see it being hypothetically |
11 |
> useful is if we need to set a use-dep. That is, package bar might |
12 |
> have a dep on dev-lib/libfoo[-ssp] (or nossp or whatever). |
13 |
> |
14 |
> However, what I don't know is whether that will be helpful. If it is, |
15 |
> then it might make sense to make an exception, otherwise I agree that |
16 |
> overloading CFLAGS in USE flags is bad. |
17 |
|
18 |
We're talking about the ssp (nossp) flag on gcc, not target ebuilds. |
19 |
Ebuilds have to do stuff like '-fno-stack-protector'. The flag on gcc |
20 |
rebuilds whole gcc just to change the global default. |
21 |
|
22 |
-- |
23 |
Best regards, |
24 |
Michał Górny |