| 1 |
This is in fact possible and does not require new flag introguction. Just |
| 2 |
define you CFLAGS in src_compile and pass them to make. You can easily to |
| 3 |
redefine or add something to C[XX]Flags. If you want to only remove some |
| 4 |
specific flags you will need to do some bash magic (though I am sure such |
| 5 |
utils exist already, if not its a few lines of python code). |
| 6 |
In the last case you indeed may want some automation on the side of |
| 7 |
portage scripts. For details on how to do such CFLAGS modifications |
| 8 |
just grep for CFLAGS under /usr/portage and read files which match. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
If you want this to be seriously considered by core developers (since |
| 11 |
this is a modification to portage) this is what you will need to do (from |
| 12 |
my experience): |
| 13 |
write more detailed proposal (not very long though) and spend some time on |
| 14 |
motivations - why this is necessary. Then submit this onto bugs.gentoo.org |
| 15 |
as a feature request (put it under: gentoo/portage/enhancement). |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
George |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Zach Forrest wrote: |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
> I've been working on an ebuild recently and the package won't compile |
| 24 |
> with the '-funroll-loops' compiler flag. It might be nice to have a |
| 25 |
> couple of variables such as 'BAD_CFLAGS' and 'BAD_CXXFLAGS' that would |
| 26 |
> tell portage to remove these compiler flags for a particular ebuild. |
| 27 |
> This would provide a uniform way to deal with any similar problems |
| 28 |
> without someone having to modify their optimization settings for one ebuild. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> Any thoughts? |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> Zach |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> _______________________________________________ |
| 35 |
> gentoo-dev mailing list |
| 36 |
> gentoo-dev@g.o |
| 37 |
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev |
| 38 |
> |
Archives