Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Rick \\\"Zero_Chaos\\\" Farina" <zerochaos@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Detecting ignored *FLAGS
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 21:38:15
Message-Id: 500C72C1.10500@gentoo.org
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA1
3
4 (Sorry for resend but I really should have been paying attention to
5 which account I was sending from)
6
7 Recently a bug was filed against one of my packages with something I had
8 thought was impossible, package wasn't respecting CFLAGS:
9
10 https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=426766
11
12 The reason I thought this was impossible, was because I have
13 - -frecord-gcc-switches in CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS (and it's a C++ application).
14
15 I opened up a bug to learn more, and learned a lot very quickly:
16
17 https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=427654
18
19 As it turns out, it is documented inside portage itself that CFLAGS,
20 CXXFLAGS, FFLAGS, FCFLAGS all need to have -frecord-gcc-switches or the
21 QA mechanism doesn't work.
22
23 It would seem to me that we could get all these QA warning out of the
24 way very quickly by adding -frecord-gcc-switches to the *FLAGS in the
25 base profile (it appears to be platform agnostic but if I'm wrong we can
26 add it for supported arches).
27
28 YES, I admit this will cause users to see warnings for a short period of
29 adjustment, but it will be non-fatal and help us get all these packages
30 resolved much faster. It shouldn't be up to flameeyes to be the only
31 one doing QA like this (because I thought I was but clearly I've been
32 doing it wrong and I can't be alone in that).
33
34 Thanks,
35 Zero
36
37 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
38 Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
39 Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
40
41 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQDHLBAAoJEKXdFCfdEflKlVQQAKFPvhzS/1kpa8zAV+mXdKw3
42 znLqoi2NNO4Z03GBdt9VyNXDT+nCL1VDzbH8OLjQnHas+88Zguhsr0bueEJ2Avti
43 XfTVTH1ZCGmpbLi2aAJfFxiqAfYvzgyJoQ36AjSGqgkMFG+GOeO/Z8P/mr4zEMDP
44 xROEBEWQhZGYuvnMECPOfruXfCXwe5TA4WD3k+9CzjmXz/bxfB6fNVeHwQWX3V5/
45 fXPnAuQEhMQ0jM+KkNxFgPqw3OuDg1rwC09uCm06lkp1LSOr77d1xtvrfR4rfpgE
46 agQ58usTy7Hyypmml7QdBTX7ox74epmCRxoGLdu9ChXe7x0jVCi0SFdLXpfuVnZO
47 7nyrHlIqxGVjCtU78loAAF2TFBc4UoLOqIxJ5zd2GVuUv/JIWKrtFPk0dcsu/u5t
48 dFQD2cpzgg+YqXJku2vChWzAdol8+236wiHzwZO6cyRlnCi9Ca1DQZwG1Y4QxAMD
49 2aPQ5BwHDwZkpoytn7A3FAX84hQq3JuO5CzEixOu3qQQ2tvAVOiro3o+/caep6nF
50 a1gqghVj23DM76zBimpVpVBvKNhuZlRzeN+F/uZv7ssMjHlIb2ypkeA/EZXo/Plp
51 +ItWSSMt42H5DyFeCqFNZX1/xXcyzG1WyoktPipeVMqVDI2yEQyYmCXVdqXNG72w
52 WAgJxX95gm8xommGAVH7
53 =Yq4L
54 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Detecting ignored *FLAGS Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] Detecting ignored *FLAGS "Diego Elio Pettenò" <flameeyes@×××××××××.eu>