From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:39689) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jL2bM-0007tz-Ou for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Apr 2020 06:34:05 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jL2bL-0001h4-Ek for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Apr 2020 06:34:04 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:33698) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jL2bK-0001gQ-0b for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Apr 2020 06:34:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jL2bJ-00012G-RY for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Apr 2020 06:34:01 -0400 Subject: [bug#40445] gnu: gsm: Update to 1.0.19. Resent-Message-ID: From: Mathieu Othacehe References: <87pncmcjuo.fsf@gmail.com> <87d08ms22w.fsf@gmail.com> <9fde0f2d6cf97a9368ae132a717cf18a@disroot.org> <06e6a1cfe8a54f80493a4e9f2820399b@disroot.org> <265df2102f5ed69aa35fc059dbb4d8e5@disroot.org> Date: Sun, 05 Apr 2020 12:33:16 +0200 In-Reply-To: <265df2102f5ed69aa35fc059dbb4d8e5@disroot.org> (Raghav Gururajan's message of "Sun, 05 Apr 2020 10:28:20 +0000") Message-ID: <87wo6ub4sz.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Raghav Gururajan Cc: 40445@debbugs.gnu.org >> We can do that too. But this seems simple and less messy :-) > > Also, I believe, the make-flag just overwrites that line in the source. Yes that's what it does. But if in a future release this package updates its CCFLAGS list in the Makefile, we will have to update our own package definition accordingly. That's why adding 'CCFLAGS += -fPIC' somewhere seems safer to me. Mathieu