[PATCH] LDFLAGS configuration
Rob Landley
rob at landley.net
Thu Jun 8 00:59:08 UTC 2006
On Wednesday 07 June 2006 5:00 pm, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > It has to do with the fact that the slowdown I'm seeing is due to
> > explicit <snip>
> >
> > Sorry, thought it was obvious.
>
> except this little rant has nothing to do with the patch at hand
> considering the default build speed would be completely unchanged
This patch was proposed in expectation of adding yet more flags. I really
don't care whether or not you agree with me on this one: I don't like it.
> Shaun's patch adds user-specified flags which default to nothing ... and if
> the user throws something in, the make system wouldnt be checking them,
> simply assuming the user didnt screw anything up
As I mentioned in an email to Shaun, entangling the configure for the build
environment specification with the feature list for busybox is something I've
thought about undoing already. For example, the Linux kernel uses
CROSS_COMPILE and CFLAGS supplied from the command line (either as
environment variables or make arguments). Why is that a bad model?
> -mike
Rob
--
Never bet against the cheap plastic solution.
More information about the busybox
mailing list