* Török Edwin wrote on Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 08:50:24PM CET: > I'm not subscribed to the upstream ML, but when you have any patches > you'd like me to test, please send me an e-mail.
Sure. > > Many flags need changed libtool semantics, when passed through. > > For example, just passing through -flto without further changes > > let me find one GCC bug > > Maybe you hit this bug? (mixing -O flags) > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42402 No. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43542 > > and half a dozen Libtool testsuite failures > > and several places where libtool needs to be changed. It's simply > > more robust to strip unknown flags. > > Fair enough. > > Could libtool give a warning when it strips a flag though? > Not everyone inspects the link command-line passed to gcc, so they may > think they used an optimization flag (other than -O), but in reality > libtool stripped it. I'm not sure whether warning by default would not be too verbose for many users. It's something to think about, but likely not by default. I agree that this behavior is somewhat obscure otherwise, though. Thanks, Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
