From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Neil Horman Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/15 v2] makefiles: Fixed -share command line option error Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2014 13:36:29 -0400 Message-ID: <20140418173629.GA6597@localhost.localdomain> References: <1397585169-14537-2-git-send-email-nhorman@tuxdriver.com> <465940823.XQ0HDUOTVm@xps13> <20140418131849.GC4053@localhost.localdomain> <49923176.Wq7YvMNVY1@xps13> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org To: Thomas Monjalon Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <49923176.Wq7YvMNVY1@xps13> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org Sender: "dev" On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 03:29:01PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2014-04-18 09:18, Neil Horman: > > On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 01:23:19PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > I think that CPU_LDFLAGS should be prefixed with -Wl, in case of CC > > > linking. So blindly assigning CC to LD variable seems a bad idea. > > > Other makefiles have different O_TO_S commands depending of LINK_USING_CC. > > > > I'm not so sure about that. Or more specifically, I wonder if some more > > rework isn't needed here. I say that because, while what you say makes > > sense in terms of formatting the CPU_FLAGS variable for use with CC, the > > only current use of CPU_LDFLAGS set -melf_i386, which IIRC is a gcc flag, > > not meant to be passed to LD. I can change the makefile to completely > > rewrite the comand based on LINK_USING_CC, but it seems to me that > > CPU_LDFLAGS should not be passed in the use of the LD case. > > Right, -melf_i386 shouldn't be a LDFLAG. > Feel free to fix it. > By the way, It's cleaner to prepare -Wl prefixing and keep an empty LDFLAGS. > Right, We're heading into a long weekend here. On monday I'll clean this up by separating the LD and CC commands based on LINK_USING_CC, and pass the proper options to each. Neil > -- > Thomas >