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: Different *CFLAGS in gcc/Makefile.in

From: Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu dot org>
To: Basile STARYNKEVITCH <basile at starynkevitch dot net>
Cc: Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf dot Wildenhues at gmx dot de>, GCC Mailing List <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 16:12:43 +0100
Subject: Re: Different *CFLAGS in gcc/Makefile.in
References: <47E020C9.90405@starynkevitch.net> <20080319183203.GA7537@ins.uni-bonn.de> <47E17908.3060201@starynkevitch.net>

## the C flags (without any gcc -I...stuff) to be included in
## compilation of MELT generated C code thru the melt-cc-script
## do not put  $(INTERNAL_CFLAGS) $(COVERAGE_FLAGS) $(WARN_CFLAGS) ##there!
MELT_CFLAGS= $(X_CFLAGS) $(T_CFLAGS) $(CFLAGS) $(XCFLAGS)

But I'm not sure of the T_CFLAGS (it probably is related to target specific stuff only).

T_CFLAGS is flags that the *target* decides to add. It's actually used only by ia64/t-hpux and gcc.c, and getting rid of it in some way would be a good thing.

I think you're okay with your choice.

Paolo

References:
- Different *CFLAGS in gcc/Makefile.in
  - From: Basile STARYNKEVITCH
- Re: Different *CFLAGS in gcc/Makefile.in
  - From: Ralf Wildenhues
- Re: Different *CFLAGS in gcc/Makefile.in
  - From: Basile STARYNKEVITCH

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