On 2007-02-26 07:14:31 -0500, Salvatore Domenick Desiano wrote: > I guess it's unclear to me as well why we wouldn't follow TN2137 by > default.
This would be a good idea, but other CFLAGS options may be needed for some ports, in particular a different optimization option. So, it is important that CFLAGS is built in a consistent order. IMHO, to avoid problems, MacPorts should have a default CFLAGS value, e.g. "-O -g" (as suggested by Apple). Then there should be a command to append options to CFLAGS before calling configure, e.g. configure.cflags-append. The universal variant should have configure.cflags-append \ "-isysroot /Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.4u.sdk -arch i386 -arch ppc" and the portfile could add other options if need be. Perhaps ditto for LDFLAGS. This way, there shouldn't be any problem with overridden CFLAGS/LDFLAGS. -- Vincent Lefèvre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arenaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
