Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: LDFLAGS overriding

From: Reini Urban <rurban(at)x-ray(dot)at>
To:
Cc: pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: LDFLAGS overriding
Date: 2004-09-30 11:24:21
Message-ID: 415BECE5.20701@x-ray.at (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches
Neil Conway schrieb:
> [ CC'ing Peter since this is usually his area ]
> On Wed, 2004-09-29 at 02:10, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
>>I think your 'override' fix is correct.  Personally I think override
>>should be used in most cases in our code because we are usually careful
>>to add to any flags already supplied by the user.
> 
> Ok, I think 'override' is definitely correct for the instance the patch
> fixes, since the build breaks otherwise. Therefore I intend to apply the
> patch I posted earlier to HEAD shortly, barring any objections.
> 
> In addition, we modify LDFLAGS in the following places:
> 
> (1) src/Makefile.global.in -- adding rpath flags
> 
> (2) src/Makefile.global.in -- adding LDFLAGS due to COPT/PROFILE
> 
> (3) src/makefiles/Makefile.hpux
> 
> (4) src/makefiles/Makefile.irix
> 
> (5) src/makefiles/Makefile.qnx4
> 
> (6) src/makefiles/Makefile.svr4
> 
> What do folks think about using override in these situations?

I think that LDFLAGS overriding is in some situations bad for newer 
libtool, as it is used with some postgresql contrib makefiles and 
interfaces.

LIBS are added to LDFLAGS where they really should be added to
LIBS, not LDFLAGS.
This causes incorrect order in the linker command-line, which fails in 
building shared libs. A similar problem as with building php.
-- 
Reini Urban
http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/home/rurban/

In response to

Responses

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: JEDIDIAHDate: 2004-09-30 15:54:50
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Point in Time Recovery
Previous:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2004-09-30 10:30:11
Subject: Re: minor doc change

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group