From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnout Vandecappelle Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 14:51:19 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] httping: new package In-Reply-To: <87ehhnudd9.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> References: <1358036972-10406-1-git-send-email-gilles.talis@gmail.com> <20130113120500.0ad7be3a@skate> <87ehhnudd9.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> Message-ID: <50FAA4D7.10006@mind.be> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On 14/01/13 14:02, Peter Korsgaard wrote: >>>>>> "Gilles" == Gilles Talis writes: > > Gilles> I forgot to copy mailing list. > Gilles> Sorry about that and thanks for your help. > Gilles> Gilles. > > Gilles> 2013/1/13 Gilles Talis > > Gilles> Dear Thomas, > > Gilles> I thought I knew Makefiles better than that. Well, I was wrong :-). > Gilles> The reason why TARGET_CONFIGURE_OPTS does not work in this case is because > Gilles> it overrides the original Makefile's CFLAGS variable (that should be kept > Gilles> in order for target to compile). Apart from adding "override" in the > Gilles> package Makefile, I actually do not see how to use TARGET_CONFIGURE_OPTS > Gilles> and still keep Makefile CFLAGS. Any hint? > Gilles> This will surely help me for future patches/projects. > > That's indeed how it is normally done. > > override CFLAGS += .. No. Normally CFLAGS should be assigned to either as CFLAGS += or CFLAGS ?= and the user-settable CFLAGS are passed in the environment. I think most Makefiles follow that convention. Patch follows. Regards, Arnout -- Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286500 Essensium/Mind http://www.mind.be G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle GPG fingerprint: 7CB5 E4CC 6C2E EFD4 6E3D A754 F963 ECAB 2450 2F1F