herb at sgi.com
Wed Apr 11 04:06:37 GMT 2001
> I still disagree with the solution. Why touch CFLAGS at all if
> someone already has it set? If someone sets CFLAGS, I think we
> should believe they know what they are doing.
> albert chin (china at thewrittenword.com)
That is what I thought as well at first. The problem comes when
someone has CFLAGS set in their environment (maybe they don't
even realize it is set or they set it because they need extra
options) and then they run
hoping to set things up for a debug compile. The old way you
would have thrown away your CFLAGS settings. In the other case
we want to insure samba is compiled optimized by default.
Maybe all compilers default to optimized but since I'm not positive
(I haven't used every platform samba runs on and tried every
compiler). This at least ensures the default intent is specified.
This solution at least allows the intent of CFLAGS to be preserved
and still allows the configure options to do what you expect.
Personally I always set CFLAGS because I have other options I
want or need. Under the original code, my CFLAGS got duplicated.
No big deal as far as functionality but it just looked "ugly".
Now at least only my "-O" gets duplicated.
I didn't make the original change I just "fixed" it to do what
I guessed the original intent was.
Unless there is a lot of oposition to the current setup I would
recommend it stay as it gives the "least surprises" to the
not so technical. Others please speak up if you disagree. This
is not cast in stone and I have no personal feelings either way.
Besides I don't have the last say :-)
More information about the samba-technical