On 04/09/2010 02:09 AM, Thomas Orgis wrote:
Am Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:19:46 -0600
schrieb Ed Hartnett<ed@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
* A new nc-config script to help users build netCDF programs
without having to deduce all the needed compiler options.
I have an issue with nc-config ... it contains too many flags. Example:
I build NetCDF with FFLAGS="-O -g -M/prefix/include" (since I have figured out
to need the -M for using Fortran with this compiler) ... then, the resulting nc-config
will return this:
shell$ nc-config --fflags
-O -g -M/prefix/include -M/prefix/include
So it packs my FFLAGS in front and adds the -M path for the module. What I
expect from such a tool is that it _only_ adds the -M part (or -I for GNU
compiler). Not only is it redundant to have my optimizations specified twice
when including $(nc-config --fflags) into my FFLAGS, it can actually cause
conflicts with other (optimization) flags I choose.
Is there a special reason why all of FFLAGS from the build is included in
nc-config?
I am aware of at least one compiler (I think it was open64) that, given some
advanced optimization flags, produces libraries that are incompatible with
programs built with more conservative flags. But that is a rare case and should
rather be considered a bug in the compiler... or a special option for crazy
people that should at least make sure they build everything with one set of
flags.
Alrighty then,
Thomas.
I agree that they should not be present, as with cflags:
cflags=" -I${includedir}"
fflags="@FFLAGS@ @MOD_FLAG@${includedir}"
--
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222
NWRA/CoRA Division FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane orion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.cora.nwra.com
