From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Korsgaard Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2019 18:19:55 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] package/jitterentropy-library: fix build failure due to missing -fPIC In-Reply-To: <831e0090-8e52-9c2c-6d06-4557d21fde79@mind.be> (Arnout Vandecappelle's message of "Wed, 23 Oct 2019 23:56:29 +0200") References: <20191023110605.23836-1-giulio.benetti@benettiengineering.com> <831e0090-8e52-9c2c-6d06-4557d21fde79@mind.be> Message-ID: <8736fgkdas.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net >>>>> "Arnout" == Arnout Vandecappelle writes: Hi, >> + >> define JITTERENTROPY_LIBRARY_BUILD_CMDS >> - $(TARGET_MAKE_ENV) $(MAKE) -C $(@D) $(TARGET_CONFIGURE_OPTS) >> + $(TARGET_MAKE_ENV) $(MAKE) -C $(@D) $(TARGET_CONFIGURE_OPTS) CFLAGS="$(JITTERENTROPY_LIBRARY_CFLAGS)" > And here we see the actual issue: TARGET_CONFIGURE_OPTS should be passed in the > environment instead of as arguments, so the Makefile can add its stuff to it. > Hm, but maybe there are indeed good reasons to override the CFLAGS, because the > fstack-protector-all requires support from the toolchain. On the other hand, we > probably *do* want to keep the -O0 and -fwrapv flags... The fstack-protector-* options should be handled by BR2_SSP_* and hardcoded in the package. Why would we want to use -O0? -- Bye, Peter Korsgaard