From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40794)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1jL2uh-0002YN-BJ
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Apr 2020 06:54:04 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1jL2ug-0004lf-Bb
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Apr 2020 06:54:03 -0400
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:33717)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16)
 (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>)
 id 1jL2ug-0004lU-8Q
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Apr 2020 06:54:02 -0400
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1jL2ug-0002B0-5O
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Apr 2020 06:54:02 -0400
Subject: [bug#40445] gnu: gsm: Update to 1.0.19.
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.40445.B40445.15860840178261@debbugs.gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Sun, 05 Apr 2020 10:53:34 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: "Raghav Gururajan" <raghavgururajan@disroot.org>
Message-ID: <41a61a922bd5ec0c22388c6c8d60e235@disroot.org>
In-Reply-To: <14a100f71916e1de2ba69279984e320b@disroot.org>
References: <14a100f71916e1de2ba69279984e320b@disroot.org>
 <f2f7717677aec8b046fe1b6b2da2fe9b@disroot.org> <87wo6ub4sz.fsf@gmail.com>
 <b633146363e6944017f5aa752f577237@disroot.org> <87pncmcjuo.fsf@gmail.com>
 <87d08ms22w.fsf@gmail.com> <9fde0f2d6cf97a9368ae132a717cf18a@disroot.org>
 <06e6a1cfe8a54f80493a4e9f2820399b@disroot.org>
 <265df2102f5ed69aa35fc059dbb4d8e5@disroot.org>
List-Id: <guix-patches.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-patches>,
 <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-patches>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-patches@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-patches>,
 <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-patches" <guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org>
To: Mathieu Othacehe <m.othacehe@gmail.com>
Cc: 40445@debbugs.gnu.org

>>> Yes that's what it does. But if in a future release this package upda=
tes=0A>>> its CCFLAGS list in the Makefile, we will have to update our ow=
n package=0A>>> definition accordingly. That's why adding 'CCFLAGS +=3D -=
fPIC' somewhere=0A>>> seems safer to me.=0A>> =0A>> Ah, gotcha! Hmm, I do=
n't know how to do that through. I'll have to look into code base for=0A>=
> examples.=0A> =0A> No I also think that its a double-edged sword. 'CCFL=
AGS +=3D -fPIC' also has to be changed/removed,=0A> if new release adds "=
-fPIC"?=0A=0A* Now