From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30993 invoked by alias); 31 Mar 2004 08:09:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 30983 invoked from network); 31 Mar 2004 08:09:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mta6.wss.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.85.37) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 31 Mar 2004 08:09:56 -0000 Received: from specifixinc.com (24.7.123.142) by mta6.wss.scd.yahoo.com (7.0.016) (authenticated as jim@tuliptree.org) id 405C545E00555099; Wed, 31 Mar 2004 00:09:52 -0800 Message-ID: <406A7CD9.7020003@specifixinc.com> Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 10:52:00 -0000 From: Jim Wilson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030716 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nathanael Nerode CC: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, dj@redhat.com Subject: Re: fixing vs WARN_CFLAGS vs cross builds References: <20040331044323.GA4614@twcny.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg01752.txt.bz2 > underlying problem. The recursive make command in the fixinc.sh rule > should perhaps be setting ALL_CFLAGS instead of CFLAGS because the > default .c.o rule uses ALL_CFLAGS. My last reply got messed up somehow. Sorry. Or maybe the recursive make command in the fixinc.sh rule should be setting WARN_CFLAGS to empty, because it is already included in BUILD_CFLAGS if it is supposed to be used? I haven't checked to see which makes more sense. I'm guessing that my first suggestion was the right one though. -- Jim Wilson, GNU Tools Support, http://www.SpecifixInc.com