From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Darren Hart Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] rt-tests: Support user supplied CFLAGS and LDFLAGS Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 12:45:55 -0700 Message-ID: <4F68DE73.2040608@linux.intel.com> References: <3343440fb02872debc8b49be5261aec530a205f3.1332270303.git.dvhart@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, Clark Williams , John Kacur , Denys Dmytriyenko To: Remy Bohmer Return-path: Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21]:16915 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756691Ab2CTTri (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Mar 2012 15:47:38 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-rt-users-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 03/20/2012 12:31 PM, Remy Bohmer wrote: > Hi, > > 2012/3/20 Darren Hart : >> Accept user supplied CFLAGS and LDFLAGS, overwriting the >> Makefile supplied versions. This can cause the build to >> fail if the user does not provide at least what the Makefile >> defines, but so be it. >> -CFLAGS = -D_GNU_SOURCE -Wall -Wno-nonnull -Isrc/include >> +CFLAGS ?= -D_GNU_SOURCE -Wall -Wno-nonnull -Isrc/include >> +LDFLAGS ?= > > Why not append the Makefile local flags to the user supplied flags? > Something like: > CFLAGS := $(CFLAGS) -D_GNU_SOURCE -Wall -Wno-nonnull -Isrc/include > I considered that. Ultimately, the goal is to provide more control to users, especially those who may be integrating the package into a larger build system. In this case, I think control of which warnings you display and where the includes come from should be configurable, even if it enables them to blow their feet off. -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Linux Kernel