From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [206.46.173.5] (helo=vms173005pub.verizon.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LtqSq-0005nP-KF for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 14 Apr 2009 23:46:46 +0200 Received: from gandalf.denix.org ([71.255.242.201]) by vms173005.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-7.04 (built Sep 26 2008; 32bit)) with ESMTPA id <0KI400GEE1N7AW6L@vms173005.mailsrvcs.net> for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 14 Apr 2009 16:42:49 -0500 (CDT) Received: by gandalf.denix.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4CDE86B83A8; Tue, 14 Apr 2009 17:42:43 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 17:42:43 -0400 From: Denys Dmytriyenko To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Message-id: <20090414214243.GF28306@denix.org> References: <1239694534-23578-1-git-send-email-k.kooi@student.utwente.nl> MIME-version: 1.0 In-reply-to: <1239694534-23578-1-git-send-email-k.kooi@student.utwente.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 206.46.173.5 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: denis@denix.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on serenity X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_20, FM_FAKE_HELO_VERIZON,RDNS_NONE autolearn=no version=3.2.5 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:14:11 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on linuxtogo.org) Cc: Koen Kooi Subject: Re: [STABLE][PATCH] gdbm: use LDFLAGS (fixes QA error) X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 21:46:46 -0000 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-disposition: inline On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 09:35:34AM +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: > From: Koen Kooi Is it a proper use of TARGET_CC_ARCH? As name suggests, it wasn't meant to deliver LDFLAGS to CC, only to specify the architecture. But as I can see, many recipes reuse this variable to stick additional flags for CC... So, I guess it's a common practice. Acked-by: Denys Dmytriyenko > Signed-off-by: Koen Kooi > --- > recipes/gdbm/gdbm_1.8.3.bb | 4 +++- > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/recipes/gdbm/gdbm_1.8.3.bb b/recipes/gdbm/gdbm_1.8.3.bb > index f3beb47..883022e 100644 > --- a/recipes/gdbm/gdbm_1.8.3.bb > +++ b/recipes/gdbm/gdbm_1.8.3.bb > @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ SECTION = "libs" > PRIORITY = "optional" > LICENSE = "GPL" > > -PR = "r2" > +PR = "r3" > > SRC_URI = "${GNU_MIRROR}/gdbm/gdbm-${PV}.tar.gz \ > file://makefile.patch;patch=1 \ > @@ -12,6 +12,8 @@ SRC_URI = "${GNU_MIRROR}/gdbm/gdbm-${PV}.tar.gz \ > > inherit autotools > > +TARGET_CC_ARCH += "${LDFLAGS}" > + > do_stage () { > oe_libinstall -so -a libgdbm ${STAGING_LIBDIR} > install -m 0644 ${S}/gdbm.h ${STAGING_INCDIR}/ > -- > 1.5.6.5 > > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-devel mailing list > Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel