From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf0-f180.google.com (mail-pf0-f180.google.com [209.85.192.180]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E940362135 for ; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 00:02:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf0-f180.google.com with SMTP id v190so21016867pfb.1 for ; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 16:02:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=bx659KBZhGs5viowJoTP8jubyuD0ZWtahJ3SKxMv9vg=; b=VJaLlOo7XF3tqJbwGjazfhKK+kSGtINRAThthRqBkFzfEIaoAE3hUpJnXVrzmL4vZJ BGVHdzKr8V+aUO337nFXejSMa2flmDKbf2UV54do2rnIAeGQUQ/uSLOgLHsn8GHelT6Y xK7CDgNcFAGVy/WWKVEwOKnImzrqw6rzHrY6kbX0+wnn0cseoNU/a7XJqWNskkt+3M/Q 59YkN2n9QgyMw6Nc5z4JQcJfUsy+SWWf+BRwVQG0mKI+RCcYqiCigIiUYjWbZH9pv2jl D7oWAG9M7L+UIRtsh0gAlw1ZhYHiinJ6g8sIjbSN+WVrb6g/XedzZCGt5Du9UnGH//uJ jiYA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=bx659KBZhGs5viowJoTP8jubyuD0ZWtahJ3SKxMv9vg=; b=ufQMlPGM9Pu5VApYeqtMkOyn1cZt57oFiOhLoaWS2XJ6z0NjmmrXd3FVmAPLYTQjN9 rtGMn2mJxlQarm9dDCQbd5MZnAyBa03v3JeIa9mlIi7J7HTQo7qzlAVG5rL8lTy4I8tg wWHWit6BiaGVeu2cpC++CKA8Pi00HTCBt59b9jFXnE4HlxNLq1QTKZOLz89fdNwR+bF/ IX5WZ43R/+cYB2+DaCJIdgWzJZbnAz+tqxfGlHh3Wdzw30/olExMUOuOe6Miep62E+si BmD5wHGpXZliYWLKU2zJzxBkPUwK3SWgzC2pYprdCsvXM+K9QWEoz0GsXFFri7PTDltJ yCkA== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mwjA5aJPnQ8gSG2+1XDl3u+FgsZiqQJxzalyyIuoUE2sJP9GP2jq8tej79/yiVpw== X-Received: by 10.84.129.67 with SMTP id 61mr12690042plb.16.1489017737860; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 16:02:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from haswell (c-76-102-32-192.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [76.102.32.192]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z68sm8307400pgz.11.2017.03.08.16.02.16 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 08 Mar 2017 16:02:17 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 16:02:15 -0800 From: Khem Raj To: Martin Kelly Message-ID: <20170309000212.GB24752@haswell> References: <8f9c4dbb-10b7-25b9-1f38-704645a2eab2@xevo.com> <20170308214636.GA17756@haswell> <20170308222333.GA2920@haswell> <97826fa5-1236-5811-1438-59cae184ba1e@xevo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <97826fa5-1236-5811-1438-59cae184ba1e@xevo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.0 (2017-02-23) Cc: Enrico Scholz , Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: Default rpaths in BUILD_LDFLAGS X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 00:02:17 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline On 17-03-08 15:44:52, Martin Kelly wrote: > On 03/08/2017 02:23 PM, Khem Raj wrote: > > On 17-03-08 13:56:12, Martin Kelly wrote: > > > On 03/08/2017 01:46 PM, Khem Raj wrote: > > > > > > I agree we should not need them. Of course I can run a sed line to remove > > > the rpaths from LLVM_LDFLAGS from tools/llvm-config/BuildVariables.inc (and > > > this works just fine). However, I think there's a deeper issue here: All the > > > build-time flags that llvm-config spits out (--cppflags, --cflags, > > > --cxxflags) probably need to be replaced with target versions of those > > > variables. > > > > Its fine to sed it out, we are trying to use llvm-confing in a cross env > > and this seems to be less treaded path for it, it assumes you would use > > it for building packages natively generally. > > > > > > > > Do you agree with replacing all of those, or do you think we should replace > > > only the rpaths? > > > > yes please > > > > Sorry, just to clarify, do you mean "yes, replace all of them", or "yes, > replace only the rpaths" ? :). Infact we should not use any part of BUILD_CFLAGS in determining target CFLAGS intead may be you can replace it with content of TARGET_CFLAGS