Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of jorton@redhat.com designates
 66.187.237.31 as permitted sender)
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 12:06:58 +0000
From: Joe Orton <jorton@redhat.com>
To: dev@apr.apache.org
Subject: Re: apr-1-config and user CFLAGS
Message-ID: <20090224120658.GA8517@redhat.com>
Mail-Followup-To: dev@apr.apache.org
References: <cc67648e0902231252m64ec33cw717592ff0c35d8d7@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <cc67648e0902231252m64ec33cw717592ff0c35d8d7@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor,
 Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingdom.
  Registered in UK and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903
  Directors: Michael Cunningham (USA), Brendan Lane (Ireland),
 Matt Parson (USA), Charlie Peters (USA)

On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 03:52:44PM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> Surely this is a FAQ, but I couldn't find it.  Why aren't user CFLAGS
> included in "apr-1-config --cflags"?
> A notable example of where this hurts is with a 64-bit APR build, where
> anything which uses that APR must also be 64-bit but the "CFLAGS=-m64" or
> similar which APR was built with aren't reported by apr-1-config --cflags.
> 
> CPPFLAGS, LDFLAGS, etc. are similar.

Putting compiler ABI flags in anything other than $CC is still a "don't 
do that" situation, IMO.

I don't think there is a "right" answer here in general; you can find 
users who want it to work either way.

e.g. you might like to link a libapr against some malloc debugging 
library -lmyalloc, and expect to be able to switch in a new libapr which 
is not linked against said library.  That won't work if you find that 
everything linked against libapr is already linked against -lmyalloc.

Regards, Joe