Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 14:55:39 +0000 (UTC) From: naddy@mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/41710: [port] lame update (fix CFLAGS) Message-ID: <ajtl9b$2iln$1@kemoauc.mips.inka.de> References: <200208161640.g7GGe3Dh028390@freefall.freebsd.org> <20020816191056.0a9a3b2c.Alexander@Leidinger.net> <ajjihu$jo0$1@kemoauc.mips.inka.de> <20020818142310.7245a08b.Alexander@Leidinger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> wrote: > I just want to know a showstopper argument: why do we need to remove > "-pipe" and "-Wall"? User's choice. This isn't as much a showstopper as a matter of convention. I certainly don't bother to remove the addition of such flags in ports unless they happen to be in the immediate vicinity of -Ox overrides or things that need fixing. > Depending on your answer I may want to change it in the LAME CVS. *Shrug* The rules for ports that use autoconf are pretty clear. If the user specifies CFLAGS (CXXFLAGS, CPPFLAGS) at build time, use those. If not, build with an autoconf-provided default (-O2 -g). > > cc1: warning: > > *** > > *** The -O3 flag TRIGGERS KNOWN OPTIMIZER BUGS ON THIS PLATFORM > > *** > > For which versions of gcc is this the case? I want to add a workaround > to configure. This is a FreeBSD-specific addition to--I guess--all versions of gcc we ship. Note that it is only a warning, so you can choose to ignore it. Just how warranted that warning is in the first place, is a can of worms I don't want to open here. -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy@mips.inka.de To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ajtl9b$2iln$1>