On Sunday 07 March 2010 13:59:25 ChIIph wrote: > On 03/07/10 14:50, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Sunday 07 March 2010 12:54:34 ChIIph wrote: > >> [snip] > >> The commas are only added when there's LDFLAGS being changed. > > > > you missed my point. read the whole eclass -- this function isnt only > > used on LDFLAGS. your patch opens the door to incorrectly split/mangle > > other variables. > > I know, what I wanted to say is that I've tested those changes with more > than filter-ldflags funtion, and I proposed it here because it works in > every case.
no, it really doesnt. it took me two seconds to put together an example where your change corrupted CFLAGS. an unlikely value, but a valid value nonetheless, which means your proposal is unacceptable on that merit alone. > >>> plus, there are a few other ways to trick the system. > >>> > >>> my opinion is still: > >>> - bypassing the system is sometimes useful > >>> - use separate -Wl flags and things just work > >> > >> Ok, but in the default profiles LDFLAGS are separated with commas, so > >> for that second opinion to be possible, I think that should be changed. > > > > i really have no idea what you're talking about. no default profile uses > > the multi-linker flag form. > > grep -nR LDFLAGS /usr/portage/profiles/* > (...) > /usr/portage/profiles/default/linux/make.defaults:53:LDFLAGS="-Wl,-O1" > (...) how is that relevant ? people use `filter-flags -Wl,-O1`, they dont use `filter-flags -O1`. this is not multiple linker flags combined into one -Wl. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
