Re: [gtk-list] Re: gtk.m4 patch

[Tero Pulkkinen <terop students cc tut fi>]

> > (still, it would prolly be better if AC_SUBST(GTK_CXXFLAGS) could be used,
> > but I couldnt get that one working, so it modifies CXXFLAGS directly.. )

Owen Taylor <owt1@cornell.edu> writes:
> Actually, there is no need for GTK_CXXFLAGS; GTK_CFLAGS should
> work fine with a C++ compiler in the end.

How does the GTK_CFLAGS thingy should go into the CFLAGS variable?

I always thought it puts it automatically in AC_SUBST() based on the
end of the variable name... Guess I dont really understand how
automake/autoconf works :(

> > +  CXXFLAGS="$CXXFLAGS $GTK_CFLAGS"
> > +  AC_SUBST(CXXFLAGS)
> 
> This part, though is incorrect. gtk.m4 has no business messing
> with the callers CXXFLAGS. It leaves the caller the choice
> of adding GTK_CFLAGS to CFLAGS or using it in a Makefile as
> is. The caller can do the same with CXXFLAGS. [ And the
> caller can use GTK_CFLAGS for that purpose ]
> 
> Also, the equivalent of AC_SUBST(CXXFLAGS) is already done
> automatically.

Okay, so, my Makefile.am should add GTK_CFLAGS to CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS -
and thus I dont need any fix for gtk.m4? :)

--
-- Tero Pulkkinen -- terop@modeemi.cs.tut.fi --