RE: Proposal for toolset modifications for LSB-Desktoprelease

>>special case: I'm reluctant to use a command-line option for
>>lsbcc as we don't know for sure what the back-end compiler will
>>be.  In the case of gcc it doesn't currently appear to use
>>the -T option, which is unusually lucky, but you could call
>>a different compiler.  So we may want to handle lsbcc differently.
>>
>
>We can create a shell variable to specify the product, if it 
>is not declared then have default behavior, else specify 
>product string to shell variable. 

thinking out loud here...

Most other lsbcc behavior is controlled through environment
variables, so there's a consistent feel to that.

A goal for lsbcc has been that the way the compiler is invoked
in existing makefiles not need to be changed when possible...
i.e., I still have this feeling that it's good if we can say 
"CC=lsbcc make", or maybe "CC=lsbcc ./configure ; make".  A
new environment variable could work for the former:

CC=lsbcc LSBCC_TYPE=desktop make

but I'm not sure we can automatically make that work through
other tools like autoconf, so it might need a command-line
option after all so we do:

CC="lsbcc --target=desktop" ./configure ; make