Re: updated win32 macro

[Robert Collins]

Well CFLAGS was the autoconf maintainers suggestion. I think I'll stick
with that, and let any individual maintainer (such as cgf :] ) use the
low level interface if they have a non-ordinary environment.

Rob

----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Faylor" <address@hidden>
To: "Robert Collins" <address@hidden>
Cc: <address@hidden>; <address@hidden>
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 11:08 AM
Subject: Re: updated win32 macro


> On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 09:56:43AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
> >So in a nutshell, because some packages change CFLAGS, and others
change
> >CC, we require everyone to change their Makefiles ?
> >
> >I agree that overriding CC is bad - thats why it was changed to
CFLAGS.
> >But CFLAGS is the standard way of changing the compiler behaviour -
why
> >do the makefiles over ride that? And how common a practice is that?
> >
> >In fact, on second thought, packages that override CFLAGS just use
the
> >low level interface
> >AC_PROG_CC_WIN32
> >EXTRA_CFLAGS="$WIN32FLAGS"
>
> I'm sure that the autoconf maintainers have more experience with this
> than I, but IMO relying on overriding of CC and CFLAGS isn't the way
to
> go.  When I first started changing things, I thought I could use this
> technique but I think it is too fragile.
>
> cgf
>