On Jul 27, 2010, at 5:02 PM, Barrett, Brian W wrote: > Yes, but say I'm using a custom built version of gcc that doesn't do -gstabs > quite right. Now you've screwed me.
The configure test checks to see if -gstabs+ is accepted by the compiler. > I'm a firm believer that our configure script should do what the user says, > as exactly as possible. Changing AC behavior a little bit is a gray area, > but one I'm almost ok with (since AC_PROG_CC will add -g if CFLAGS is empty). We override that, though -- we take out that -g if CFLAGS was empty. I understand what you're saying, and in general I agree -- that we should add as little as possible to what the user said. But I don't quite know how to balance: * adding as few flags as possible * making debugging symbols work for those of us who aren't familiar enough with OSX to know that you need the special/secret -gstabs+ flag (and just expect -g to be enough) I've been developing POSIX software on a Mac for several years (i.e., not Mac-specific software, so I never dived into the details of Mac-specific functionality) and fell into the 2nd category until about a week ago. Got any suggestions? -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
