[patch] Nettle add missing cflags to some objects
nisse at lysator.liu.se
Wed Aug 3 12:45:38 UTC 2016
Tomas Chvatal <TChvatal at suse.com> writes:
> we have checks that verify all objects are compiled with respecting
> cflags set in the distribution (hardening, optimization, etc.).
I see. And you can't easily exclude executables which are never installed?
Note that the Makefile rules where CC_FOR_BUILD is used produce
executables directly from a .c file, with no explicit object files.
> Hmm with the cross-compilation I am not sure how that should be handled
> properly but simply ignoring all other cflags on those objects does not
> seem like right solution.
I see two reasonable solutions. If possible, try both and report what
works. Either explicitly pass CC_FOR_BUILD="gcc
--whatever-flags-you-want" on the configure command line produced by
your build scripts. Or change the no-cross default, like
@@ -514,7 +514,7 @@ elif test -n "$HOST_CC"; then
[AC_MSG_ERROR([Specified HOST_CC doesn't seem to work])])
if test $cross_compiling = no ; then
+ CC_FOR_BUILD="$(CC) $(CFLAGS)"
for i in gcc cc c89 c99; do
(untested, not sure if this makefile syntax in CC_FOR_BUILD breaks any
use outside of Makefile).
And I guess you'll have the same problem when building gmp, so I'm
cc:ing the gmp-devel list as well.
Niels Möller. PGP-encrypted email is preferred. Keyid C0B98E26.
Internet email is subject to wholesale government surveillance.
More information about the gmp-devel