Fix for 8014669, build flags issue

BILL PITTORE bill.pittore at
Thu May 16 01:20:43 UTC 2013

On 5/15/2013 8:05 PM, David Holmes wrote:
> Hi Bill,
> (re-fixed the build-dev alias)
> On 16/05/2013 6:48 AM, BILL PITTORE wrote:
>> Some architecture dependent flags do not make it through to the
>> and makefiles. As a result, the libs are not
>> compiled/linked with the correct flags for that particular variant. Fix
>> is to make sure EXTRA_CFLAGS propogates down correctly.
> I need to look closer at this. Passing all of the EXTRA_CFLAGS as link 
> options seems wrong to me as they may not be valid linker options. 
> That said I see that in this case we are actually using the C compiler 
> to do the linking. But that said, in the saproc case we are also 
> compiling C source files at the same time which means that 
> EXTRA_CFLAGS is needed on the main command line, not tucked onto the 
> LD flags. And the implication here is that cross-compilation of 
> libsaproc has been broken all this time for any platform where the 
> default gcc output would be wrong!
Just took a look at an ARM build with and without my changes and without 
the changes you do not get any of the EXTRA_CFLAGS options when you 
compile the libjsig or libsaproc sources. You basically get the default 
for the cross tool gcc you are using, in this case ARM v5t. Could be 
different for other cross tools. We've just been lucky I guess.

> David

More information about the build-dev mailing list