On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 9:37 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin <jyass...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Mark Dickinson <dicki...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I think saving and restoring CFLAGS across AC_PROG_CC was attempted in >> http://bugs.python.org/issue8211 . It turned out that it broke OS X >> universal builds. > > Thanks for the link to the issue. http://bugs.python.org/issue8366 > says Ronald Oussoren fixed the universal builds without reverting the > CFLAGS propagation.
Yes, you're right (of course). Thanks. Looking at the current configure.in, CFLAGS *does* get saved and restored across the AC_PROG_CC call if it's non-empty; I'm not sure whether this actually (currently) has any effect, since as I understand the documentation CFLAGS won't be touched by AC_PROG_CC if it's already set. >> I'm not sure I understand the importance of allowing AC_PROG_CC to set >> CFLAGS (if CFLAGS is undefined at the point of the AC_PROG_CC); can >> someone give an example of why this is necessary? > > Marc-Andre's argument seems to be "it's possible that AC_PROG_CC adds > other flags as well (it currently doesn't, but that may well change in > future versions of autoconf)." That seems a little weak to constrain > fixing actual problems today. If it ever adds more arguments, we'll > need to inspect them anyway to see if they're more like -g or -O2 > (wanted or harmful). Okay; thanks for the explanation. Mark _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com