On Jul 7, 2014, at 2:07 AM, Sumit Bhardwaj <bhardw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just a quick update so everyone is on the same page: problem is not with > macro (autogen.sh) or configure. It seems the call for gfec.c mixes CFLAGS > and CXXFLAGS and then cc1plus or cc1 throws error. Diagnosis below. > > I did have to make changes in macros/m4_ax_check_compile_flag.m4. I pushed > those changes to my github as well. > > Next step will be to see how make is using/setting the flags. I will try to > look at that later. Do let me know if I am going on wrong track. Any help in > expediting appreciated. > > Thanks, > Sumit > > Here is my attempt at getting to the bottom of the problem: > g++ -Wall -Wunused -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations > -Wno-non-literal-null-conversion -Wno-unused -g -O2 -Werror > -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 helloworld.c > throws error while > gcc -Wall -Wunused -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations > -Wno-non-literal-null-conversion -Wno-unused -g -O2 -Werror > -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 helloworld.c > works correctly. Having helloworld.cpp for g++ doesn't change anything. > > Moreover, CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS are set correctly. > AM_CFLAGS = -Werror -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wno-pointer-sign > -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -Wall -Wunused -Wmissing-prototypes > -Wmissing-declarations -Wno-non-literal-null-conversion -Wno-unused > AM_CXXFLAGS = -Werror -Wall -Wno-unused -Wno-deprecated-register Sumit, I don't understand how you concluded that the AM_CXXFLAGS are being included when make builds gfec.c, nor do I understand why you think that it's using g++. The command make emitted when it failed was: >> gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../.. -Wno-error=deprecated-declarations >> -I../../lib/libc -I../../src -I../../src -I../../src/gnc-module >> -I../../src/app-utils/calculation -I../../src/core-utils -I../../src/engine >> -I../../src/libqof/qof -I../../src/backend/xml -pthread >> -I/usr/include/guile/2.0 -pthread -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 >> -I/usr/lib64/glib-2.0/include -pthread -I/usr/include/gtk-2.0 >> -I/usr/lib64/gtk-2.0/include -I/usr/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/include/atk-1.0 >> -I/usr/include/cairo -I/usr/include/pixman-1 -I/usr/include/libdrm >> -I/usr/include/libpng16 -I/usr/include/gdk-pixbuf-2.0 >> -I/usr/include/libpng16 -I/usr/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/include/harfbuzz >> -I/usr/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 >> -I/usr/lib64/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/include/freetype2 >> -I/usr/include/libxml2 -I/usr/include/libxml2 >> -DG_LOG_DOMAIN=\"gnc.app-utils\" -Werror -Wdeclaration-after-statement >> -Wno-pointer-sign -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -Wall -Wunused -Wmissing-prototypes >> -Wmissing-declarations -Wno-non-lite! ral-null-conversion -Wno-unused -g -O2 -MT gfec.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/gfec.Tpo -c gfec.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/gfec.o Clearly showing that it's calling gcc and clearly not including -Wno-deprecated-register. What does the no-non-literal-null-conversion section of config.log look like with the modified AX_CHECK_COMPILE_FLAG? Regards, John Ralls > > On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 10:09 AM, John Ralls <jra...@ceridwen.us> wrote: > > On Jul 6, 2014, at 6:38 PM, Sumit Bhardwaj <bhardw...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi John, >> >> That works - to an extent. gcc fails and the current configuration is: >> -Werror -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wno-pointer-sign -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 >> >> Configure doesn't fail, but that the flags are far fewer than earlier. Is >> this, what we want to go ahead with? >> >> If anyone wants to look at the changes in macros/m4_ax_check_compile_flag.m4 >> and configure.ac, I have pushed the changes to master repo on my github >> (https://github.com/bhardwajs/gnucash). >> >> Cheers, >> Sumit >> >> P.S. - Apologies for a two-month hiatus. Work drained a lot of time and >> energy. Should be better now. :) > > Real life does have a nasty habit of intruding.... ;-) > > Anyway, what do you mean by "works to an extent"? What we want is for that > test to fail in configure and for the rest of GC to compile correctly. If my > hack to AX_CHECK_COMPILE_FLAG does that, excellent, I'll push it. If not, > please post details so I can figure out the next thing to try -- or figure > out a fix yourself and make a patch for one of us to push on your behalf. We > can work with a github pull request if that's more convenient for you than a > BZ. > > Regards, > John Ralls > > _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
