On Fri, 2011-12-09 at 10:22 -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > On 12/09/11 10:12, Gaetan Nadon wrote: > > On Fri, 2011-12-09 at 09:52 -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > >> The actual diff is: > >> -if test"x$GCC" = xyes ; then > >> - XSERVER_CFLAGS="$XSERVER_CFLAGS -fno-strict-aliasing" > >> -fi > >> +XORG_TESTSET_CFLAG([NO_STRICT_ALIASING_CFLAG], [-fno-strict-aliasing]) > >> +XSERVER_CFLAGS='$(BASE_CFLAGS) $(NO_STRICT_ALIASING_CFLAG)' > >> > >> which has the net effect of changing it from hardcoding for gcc to passing > >> it to any compiler which accepts the flag, so many actually expand usage of > >> it on non-gcc compilers. > >> > > My understanding is that XORG_TESTSET_CFLAG tests the compiler flag with the > > compiler being used. During xserver configuration, I get: > > > > checking if gcc -std=gnu99 supports -fno-strict-aliasing... yes > > > > I expect that the variable will be empty on non gcc compilers but I have not > > tested that personally. > > Right, I was thinking about compilers which aren't detected as gcc but > which also support the flag - this would be a benefit, not a problem. > (I don't know if any such compilers exist, as Solaris Studio doesn't > support that flag, and I thought clang was detected as gcc by configure.) > > It also gives a good place to add alternative flags for other compilers > if we discover any need such flags.
I haven't thought about that, but yes, this macro does more than merely replacing a bunch of "ifs". Thanks for checking, it's the first time we use these new 1.16 macros.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
