[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 04/15/2008 10:07:17
AM:
> > >
> > > Yes, you are absolutely right. This was done in the beginning when
> > > automake understanding was not what it is now.
> > > If you open a bug at sourceforge.net, I will position it so that it
> > > gets fixed in one of the 2.11.x releases.
>
> The bug is created as
> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?
> func=detail&aid=1939985&group_id=71730&atid=532251
> and the removal of CFLAGS and COV_CFLAGS from AM_CFLAGS is done.
>
> Now I am working on the "NOCFLAGS" - the CFLAGS with filtered-out
> optimization. Is it really necessary to have such flags stored in
> separate variable and used only in the tests? Because it is quite hard
> to replace the content of user-supplied CFLAGS (eg. set in environment
> when running the configure script). There can be 2 ways to have a
> possibility to compile without optimization - rely on the user-supplied
> CFLAGS or add an option to configure (--disable-optimization) that will
> filter -Ox from CFLAGS as it is done now when --enable-testcover is
> supplied. What do you think about that?
The filtering out of -Ox is already being done in --enable-debuggable. I'm
ok with the elimination of NOCFLAGS. I will understand more when I see
your patch.
--Renier-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100.
Use priority code J8TL2D2.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
Openhpi-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openhpi-devel
