This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: NM and AR not being used?

From: Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>
To: Jim Wilson <wilson at specifixinc dot com>
Cc: Georg Schwarz <geos at epost dot de>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org,gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 11:53:13 +0200
Subject: Re: NM and AR not being used?
References: <E1Bidol-0000cS-D4@mikro.physik.TU-Berlin.DE><1089523197.31944.17.camel@localhost>

Jim Wilson <wilson@specifixinc.com> writes:

> We do export NM_FOR_TARGET which seems like it should work, but the
> NM_FOR_TARGET value that gets exported is the value defined in the gcc
> Makefile, not the value that was passed down from the toplevel.  I don't
> know why exports are working this way.

Local makefile assignments always override values from the environment
(unless -e).  And since we null out MAKEOVERRIDES there are no implicit
command-line overrides passed down to recursive invocations.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
SuSE Linux AG, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."

References:
- Re: NM and AR not being used?
  - From: Georg Schwarz
- Re: NM and AR not being used?
  - From: Jim Wilson

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]