Re: Options included in CC/CXX vs. in gb_CFLAGS/gb_CXXFLAGS

Hi Tor, *,

<rant>It is pointless to write to the mailinglist for feedback, if you
don't even wait two ours before taking the action you ask to be OK or
not. If you want to do it, just do it, but such "alibi" posts don't
really make much sense then.</rant>

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Tor Lillqvist <tml@iki.fi> wrote:
> > Should the -isysroot flag actually be part ot CC/CXX, not gb_CXXFLAGS?
> > Should configure.in and macosx.mk be modified thusly?
>
> That's what I did, and reverted my other attempts from this morning to
> get liborcus to build,

external modules traditionally got EXTRA_CDEFS as their CPPFLAGS and
EXTRA_CFLAGS in their CFLAGS.

> and it seems that it was a good move, the
> tinderboxes are getting greener now.

And now the build will break for those who use CC="/path/to/ccache
gcc", won't it?
I don't care personally, as I have it setup using path & symlinks.
(that configure happily doubles to call it with an additional ccache -
doppelt hält besser.)

ciao
Christian