Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 14:49:22 -0500 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Compile error with --target=i386 On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:12:39PM +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote: > On Tue, 16 Feb 2016, Rich Felker wrote: > > In the case of musl, CFLAGS is always passed even at the linking > > stage; I think the problem is just at configure time, where the > > user-provided CFLAGS are not used in all the configure-time tests. > > Maybe this is contrary to the normal UI for configure scripts and > > should be changed? > > I don't have a strong opinion whether it's contrary or not; my weak opinion is > that it is contrary, indeed; but nevertheless I stand by my original point > that -m32 is better when specified in $CC, generally speaking. > > If you look at the opening post, you'll see that -m32 does not appear on the > quoted command line. If Petr did it as he has shown, he forgot to 'export' > the variable; this would explain the failure (otherwise as you say it should > have worked). > > Also please note that $CC should have -m32 (and any other ABI tweaks) for > musl-gcc to work as intended. Yes, I agree with all this. I was just wondering if we should be including that invoking user's CFLAGS when running tests in configure. Right now I think it's inconsistent whether we do or not. Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.