The CFLAGS should go

Tushar Teredesai tushart at
Wed May 7 09:00:06 PDT 2003

Jeroen Coumans wrote:

> I remember Matthias Benkmann being strongly against the LDFLAGS. If 
> it's policy not to have policy in the book then they should also be in 
> the seperate hint.
> Reasons for LDFLAGS in the book:
> - saves space, compiling time?
> - every bit in PLFS accounted for so it doesn't affect the final LFS 
> build
> Reasons against LDFLAGS in the book:
> - another possibility for typo's (c'mon, everybody makes 'm ;)
> - building should start from a clean environment to prevent errors; 
> this is what MSB protested against. I don't know if his argument still 
> stands but it has convinced me not to use LDFLAGS during the building 
> of the toolchain.

I agree. LDFLAGS is an optimization. So its not for the book to specify.

Tushar Teredesai
  E-mail:    tushartATabbnmDOTcom
  Extension: 5267

Unsubscribe: send email to listar at
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list