hello, I had to remove '+' just after CFLAGS in makefile.sub for having ggee externals compiled for an amd64
http://pure-data.cvs.sourceforge.net/pure-data/externals/ggee/makefile.sub?r... makefile.sub line 19:
CFLAGS + = -fPIC -DPD $(WARNFLAGS)
PC
On Apr 10, 2007, at 7:13 AM, Patco wrote:
hello, I had to remove '+' just after CFLAGS in makefile.sub for having ggee externals compiled for an amd64
http://pure-data.cvs.sourceforge.net/pure-data/externals/ggee/ makefile.sub?revision=1.1&view=markup makefile.sub line 19:
CFLAGS + = -fPIC -DPD $(WARNFLAGS)
Hmm, feel like making this into a cross-platform patch?
.hc
PC
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/ listinfo/pd-list
Computer science is no more related to the computer than astronomy is
related to the telescope. -Edsger Dykstra
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Apr 10, 2007, at 7:13 AM, Patco wrote:
hello, I had to remove '+' just after CFLAGS in makefile.sub for having ggee externals compiled for an amd64
http://pure-data.cvs.sourceforge.net/pure-data/externals/ggee/ makefile.sub?revision=1.1&view=markup makefile.sub line 19:
CFLAGS + = -fPIC -DPD $(WARNFLAGS)
Hmm, feel like making this into a cross-platform patch?
i believe this is a cludge and breaks more things than it fixes. the "+=" means something different than "=". it seems though, that "+ =" is interpreted differently from "+=", this is why the compilation fails. (the latter works just fine)
if günter (or someone else with make knowledge) can confirm this, it would be good to just change the makefile.sub.
mfa-sdr IOhannes
On Apr 10, 2007, at 4:56 PM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Apr 10, 2007, at 7:13 AM, Patco wrote:
hello, I had to remove '+' just after CFLAGS in makefile.sub for having
ggee externals compiled for an amd64http://pure-data.cvs.sourceforge.net/pure-data/externals/ggee/ makefile.sub?revision=1.1&view=markup makefile.sub line 19:
CFLAGS + = -fPIC -DPD $(WARNFLAGS)
Hmm, feel like making this into a cross-platform patch?
i believe this is a cludge and breaks more things than it fixes. the "+=" means something different than "=". it seems though, that "+ =" is interpreted differently from "+=", this is why the compilation fails. (the latter works just fine)
if günter (or someone else with make knowledge) can confirm this, it would be good to just change the makefile.sub.
The easy way to test that is make the change then watch the auto- builds to see if anything breaks.
.hc
mfa-sdr IOhannes
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/ listinfo/pd-list
¡El pueblo unido jamás será vencido!