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: Question on BOOT_CFLAGS vs. CFLAGS

From: Paolo Bonzini <paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch>
To: Mike Stump <mrs at apple dot com>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Josh Conner <jconner at apple dot com>, Paul Brook <paul at codesourcery dot com>
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 10:02:06 +0100
Subject: Re: Question on BOOT_CFLAGS vs. CFLAGS
References: <4581FC47.4050700@apple.com> <200612150159.16566.paul@codesourcery.com> <BBE5DF76-11F9-4F3E-8C42-2F0730E15B55@apple.com>

http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Makefile.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/install/build.html
I read that, could you please quote the part that documents the current behavior.

If you wish to use non-default GCC flags when compiling the stage2 and stage3 compilers, set BOOT_CFLAGS on the command line when doing `make'. Non-default optimization flags are less well tested here than the default of `-g -O2', but should still work.

Let me offer a counter quote:

The counter quote is obviously wrong, thanks for the report.

Paolo

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Question on BOOT_CFLAGS vs. CFLAGS
  - From: Mike Stump
- Re: Question on BOOT_CFLAGS vs. CFLAGS
  - From: Paul Brook
- Re: Question on BOOT_CFLAGS vs. CFLAGS
  - From: Gerald Pfeifer

References:
- Question on BOOT_CFLAGS vs. CFLAGS
  - From: Josh Conner
- Re: Question on BOOT_CFLAGS vs. CFLAGS
  - From: Paul Brook
- Re: Question on BOOT_CFLAGS vs. CFLAGS
  - From: Mike Stump

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