Brad, Can you comment on what other stuff ends up in <FLAGS>? If it's just CMAKE_<LANG>_FLAGS, I guess redefining CMAKE_<LANG>_LINK_EXECUTABLE would be a viable workaround.
Thanks, Arjen >-----Original Message----- >From: Brad King [mailto:brad.k...@kitware.com] >Sent: maandag 12 juli 2010 19:20 >To: Verweij, Arjen >Cc: cmake@cmake.org >Subject: Re: [CMake] CMAKE_<LANG>_FLAGS added to link rule > >On 07/12/2010 01:12 PM, Verweij, Arjen wrote: >> As a follow-up: redefining CMAKE_Fortran_LINK_EXECUTABLE to not >include >> <FLAGS> gets rid of the CMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS.. but perhaps other >(useful) >> stuff as well? As a sidetrack I'm starting to wonder what the purpose >of >> CMAKE_<LANG>_FLAGS is. The book lists it as cmake's counterpart of the >> environment variable, e.g. CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS and CXXFLAGS from the >shell, >> which means it doesn't make sense to include it when linking. Am I >> overlooking something here J > >AFAIK no one designed it this way, it "just happened" over time during >development. My guess is that people wanted compile flags like "-m64" >to be passed when the compiler is used as a front-end to the linker. >Since it's been in the default rules for years we cannot change it >without breaking compatibility. > >All of this was developed before CMake supported Fortran. I've seen >very few C and C++ compilers that do not accept/ignore all of their >compiler flags even when used as a linking front-end. That's likely >why this wasn't caught at the beginning. > >-Brad _______________________________________________ Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
