[arch-general] Enforcing CFLAGS in PKGBUILDs

[Allan McRae]

On 05/08/11 09:35, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
> In the course of a discussion with the xwax [1] developer, I was asked
> the question why we would override CFLAGS (optimization levels, in
> particular) if upstream already provides them. Given that there are in
> fact loads of packages in our repositories that seem to follow this
> practice (`grep -- '-O[0-9]' /var/abs/*/*/PKGBUILD` reveals some of
> those), I'm forwarding this question to the ML.
>
> My own opinion is that we shouldn't patch anything here. While using the
> same optimization flags for all packages might result in some kind of
> consistency, one of our main guidelines - not to do any unnecessary
> modifications - is kind of violated here. We should trust upstream
> having chosen any explicit optimization flags with care (in some cases,
> enforcing optimization flags might even lead to heavy performance
> impacts - although this is unlikely to happen). I am aware that there
> are some corner cases for sure, for which I'd say overriding CFLAGS is
> okay. However, this shouldn't be common practice, imho.
>
> Opinions?
>

My opinion is that the upstream Makefile should add their CFLAGS and not 
override the ones provided by the environment unless there is a very 
good reason to do so.   That way everybody gets the CFLAGS they want.

Allan