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: Mike Stump <mrs at apple dot com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch>
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 01:42:39 -0800
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> <4582648E.7040205@lu.unisi.ch>

On Dec 15, 2006, at 1:02 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:

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

Why it is important to not have CFLAGS influence the build product? The standard, is for it to so influence the build product. Why is it important for gcc to not follow the standard?

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Question on BOOT_CFLAGS vs. CFLAGS
  - From: Paolo Bonzini
- Re: Question on BOOT_CFLAGS vs. CFLAGS
  - From: Andrew Pinski

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
- Re: Question on BOOT_CFLAGS vs. CFLAGS
  - From: Paolo Bonzini

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