[Qemu-devel] Re: [COMMIT 8a2e6ab] Remove CFLAGS parameter in cc-option

[Anthony Liguori]

malc wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Sep 2009, Juan Quintela wrote:
>
>   
> > malc <address@hidden> wrote:
> >     
> > > On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > >
> > >       
> > > > From: Juan Quintela <address@hidden>
> > > >
> > > > With cc-option we are testing if gcc just accept a particular option, we 
> > > > don't need CFLAGS at all.  And this fixes the recursive problem with 
> > > > CFLAGS
> > > >         
> > > This is nonsense, previous options, those in CFLAGS, might conflict with
> > > the new ones.
> > >       
> > The only thing that we are testing is if gcc support that _option_
> >
> > What is the use case tat you have in mind?  A first grep on gcc man page
> > don't show options that conflict with each other.
> >     
>
> If you want artificial exmaples i can come up with plenty, and from the
> top of my head -m486 with -msse2 are quite incompatible with each other,
> furthermore, point is this - testing one option in isolation is broken.
>   

I think this is a pretty valid point.  I think it's worth while to try 
and better understand what the recursion problem was in the first place.

--
Regards,

Anthony Liguori