From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32979 invoked by alias); 21 Jan 2016 11:37:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 32963 invoked by uid 89); 21 Jan 2016 11:37:07 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 11:37:06 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9AE88F517; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 11:37:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u0LBb4iu008379; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 06:37:05 -0500 Message-ID: <56A0C2E0.9070701@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 11:37:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Simon Marchi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb: Respect CXXFLAGS when building with C++ compiler References: <1453288024-19890-1-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <569FE883.7050706@ericsson.com> <569FF0B2.7070300@redhat.com> <56A00FC7.7030100@ericsson.com> In-Reply-To: <56A00FC7.7030100@ericsson.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-01/txt/msg00511.txt.bz2 On 01/20/2016 10:52 PM, Simon Marchi wrote: > On 16-01-20 03:40 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: >> Yeah, it crossed my mind too, but then all others end up _CFLAGS, >> like INTERNAL_CFLAGS, GLOBAL_CFLAGS, GDB_WERROR_CFLAGS, >> INTERNAL_WARN_CFLAGS, etc., which are used in c++ too, >> that I thought it ended up looking the odd one out. WDYT? > > Then you can change the others too :) > > INTERNAL_CFLAGS -> INTERNAL_COMPILER_FLAGS > GLOBAL_CFLAGS -> GLOBAL_COMPILER_FLAGS > GDB_WERROR_CFLAGS -> GDB_WERROR_COMPILER_FLAGS > etc... > > But it's a minor detail and probably temporary too, so I'm fine > with COMPILER_CFLAGS. Yeah, I'd rather not change everything. Maybe we'll rename all those to INTERNAL_CXXFLAGS, etc. soon enough. :-) I've pushed the patch in now. Thanks, Pedro Alves