On 15 March 2018 at 13:11, Jan Engelhardt <jeng...@inai.de> wrote: > > On Thursday 2018-03-15 13:20, Pekka Paalanen wrote: >>> diff --git a/Makefile.am b/Makefile.am >>> index b5c29c04..8de40e51 100644 >>> --- a/Makefile.am >>> +++ b/Makefile.am >>> @@ -43,7 +43,8 @@ AM_CPPFLAGS = \ >>> -I$(top_builddir)/protocol \ >>> -DLIBWESTON_MODULEDIR='"$(libweston_moduledir)"' \ >>> -DLIBEXECDIR='"$(libexecdir)"' \ >>> - -DBINDIR='"$(bindir)"' >>> + -DBINDIR='"$(bindir)"' \ >>> + $(LIBINPUT_BACKEND_CFLAGS) >>> >>> CLEANFILES = weston.ini \ >>> ivi-shell/weston.ini \ >> >>I don't think we want the libinput flags on *everything* > > It does not really matter, the libinput API is not bad. > Not nearly as bad as some science software, anyhow. > > The "only" downside of using target_CPPFLAGS is that > (a) the generated Makefile, Makefile.in gets bigger - somewhat larger release > tarball > (b) sources part of multiple targets can get built twice to accomodate > invocations > with different CPPFLAGS, even if the different CPPFLAGS still lead to the > same gcc -E output. > Or in a Tl;Dr - there are no serious issues either way. Proposed patch/result is shorter. Regardless, will send v2 in a moment.
> >>Or do you think we should actually have CFLAGS of all deps with >>everything we build, and just gate the LIBS we link with to the targets >>that actually need it? > > That's the easy way, and the one requiring the fewest keystrokes IMO. Agreed. Some projects opt for unconditionally add all CFLAGS, while others prefer to keep it conditional. In either case, I'd welcome if any notable changes/reshuffle do not hold this* fix. Thanks Emil * ... or analogous of course. _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
