mingw build: allow to pass custom CFLAGS

[vszakats]

Allow to pass custom CFLAGS options via environment variable CURL_CFLAG_EXTRAS (the name comes from makefile.am where it serves a similar purpose). Default and automatically added options of makefile.m32 have preference over custom ones. This addition is useful for passing f.e. custom CPU tuning or LTO optimization (-flto -ffat-lto-objects) options. The only current way to do this is to edit makefile.m32. This patch makes it unnecessary.

[gknauf]

Hi Viktor,
On 09.01.2015 04:49, Viktor Szakáts wrote:

Allow to pass custom |CFLAGS| options via environment variable
|CURL_CFLAG_EXTRAS| (the name comes from |makefile.am| where it serves a
similar purpose). Default and automatically added options of
|makefile.m32| have preference over custom ones. This addition is useful
for passing f.e. custom CPU tuning or LTO optimization (|-flto
-ffat-lto-objects|) options. The only current way to do this is to edit
|makefile.m32|. This patch makes it unnecessary.
your patch seems wrong because you didnt remove the original line ;-)
so with next (original) line CFLAGS is overwritten again and the
CURL_CFLAG_EXTRAS are lost ...
optherwise I'm fine with this patch.

Günter.

[vszakats]

Indeed, very sorry, corrected it.

[gknauf]

On 09.01.2015 21:03, Viktor Szakáts wrote:

Indeed, very sorry, corrected it.
great!
Can you please also keep one newline at the end - some Windows editors
dont behave good when you dont have a newline after last line ...
same goes also for #134 ...

Günter.

[vszakats]

There is one new-line after the last line, which should be enough to make editors and git happy. Before the edit there were three of them. Are you sure that is necessary?

Before the edit:

0000002360: 41 52 45 53 5F 50 41 54 │ 48 29 20 2D 66 20 4D 61  ARES_PATH) -f Ma
0000002370: 6B 65 66 69 6C 65 2E 6D │ 33 32 **0D 0A 0D 0A 0D 0A**  kefile.m32

After the edit:

0000002380: 2D 66 20 4D 61 6B 65 66 │ 69 6C 65 2E 6D 33 32 **0D  -f Makefile.m32
0000002390: 0A**                      │                          

[gknauf]

On 09.01.2015 21:54, Viktor Szakáts wrote:

There is one new-line after the last line, which should be enough to
make editors and git happy. Before the edit there were three of them.
Are you sure that is necessary?
no. I will now try to merge it with the GitHub interface - lets see if I
manage that, and then we will see afterwards what my editors say; but
I've just looked and you'Re right - I see 3 ...; I was a bit misleaded
from the GitHub diff ...

Günter.