From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] Making CFLAGS compilant with GNU Coding Standards Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2005 13:53:24 -0700 Message-ID: <7vy87c2lrv.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <1123306575.7588.17.camel@dv.roinet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Aug 08 22:54:15 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E2Ecl-0007iu-0F for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 08 Aug 2005 22:53:31 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932220AbVHHUx1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Aug 2005 16:53:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932221AbVHHUx1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Aug 2005 16:53:27 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao02.cox.net ([68.230.241.37]:22675 "EHLO fed1rmmtao02.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932220AbVHHUx0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Aug 2005 16:53:26 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao02.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-118-20041027) with ESMTP id <20050808205326.FRIH3209.fed1rmmtao02.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Mon, 8 Aug 2005 16:53:26 -0400 To: Pavel Roskin In-Reply-To: <1123306575.7588.17.camel@dv.roinet.com> (Pavel Roskin's message of "Sat, 06 Aug 2005 01:36:15 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Pavel Roskin writes: > Quoting GNU Coding Standards ("info standards"): > > "If there are C compiler options that _must_ be used for proper > compilation of certain files, do not include them in `CFLAGS'. Users > expect to be able to specify `CFLAGS' freely themselves." Quoting Documentation/CodingStyle: This is a short document describing the preferred coding style for the linux kernel. Coding style is very personal, and I won't _force_ my views on anybody, but this is what goes for anything that I have to be able to maintain, and I'd prefer it for most other things too. Please at least consider the points made here. First off, I'd suggest printing out a copy of the GNU coding standards, and NOT read it. Burn them, it's a great symbolic gesture. This was only a tongue-in-cheek comment ;-). Seriously, I do not intend to discarded this patch, but I am currently not taking Makefile patches unless they fix real breakage. I do want to revisit Makefile issues after 0.99.4, along with the changes Pasky sent several days ago. Please remind me about them after Wednesday.