From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FyxEX-0006XU-CQ for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 07 Jul 2006 20:47:29 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k67Kj4hW027441; Fri, 7 Jul 2006 20:45:04 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k67KdlYf009088 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2006 20:39:48 GMT Received: from home.wh0rd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2B9464627 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2006 20:39:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 8710 invoked from network); 7 Jul 2006 16:27:06 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO vapier) (192.168.0.2) by 192.168.0.1 with SMTP; 7 Jul 2006 16:27:06 -0400 From: Mike Frysinger Organization: wh0rd.org To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: Gentoo vs GNU toolchain (was Re: [gentoo-dev] Replacing cpu-feature USE flags) Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2006 16:40:04 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.3 References: <200607061252.33028@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <20060707160009.1c373aea@c1358217.kevquinn.com> <20060707165304.GA3255@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20060707165304.GA3255@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2754759.TmvKnKBbG4"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200607071640.04502.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 8dfdd9e5-9582-4cff-8505-6056f745ed30 X-Archives-Hash: 0420e852e058bbb3e44d792db1ab16a4 --nextPart2754759.TmvKnKBbG4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Friday 07 July 2006 12:53, Harald van D=C4=B3k wrote: > On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 04:00:09PM +0200, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: > > If you take out the stub patches (which incidentally have no impact on > > code generation), many builds will simply fail because they expect the > > additional flags from ssp, htb etc to be there. > > That's the point. I mentioned being able to test whether your own > software compiles with a pure GNU toolchain as a desire. Being able to > see whether unofficial compiler options are used is not just a nice > extra, but even necessary for that. as i said, this really is a non-issue considering SSP has been integrated i= nto=20 mainline gcc > > Again, if you don't gave GCC_SPECS defined in your environment then > > that patch makes no difference to code generation. > > Yes, but if GCC_SPECS is defined in the environment so what's stopping you from undefining it ? =2Dmike --nextPart2754759.TmvKnKBbG4 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux) iQIVAwUARK7GpEFjO5/oN/WBAQLOfA//fP30f94RFIp1dCcU9XvzR071Ud8mzSnn WjaUAeI7aHxvdnqwDzms50nkVn7AwU/bgtonnU0TR6zHgONm7acAF4tikxWlCXFB NIJ+OAVm0tpM4JQco62FfeuPAjig4ZZAgtFTCjfjtGDfdbhzFXppx1YdXnxesT9E S4qEIWrajT21OV8/+xEpbGxm5ID2VE6CQGybFTm6rDIbQiJ0pMXLAQQNNIDSB0fS 9cPeZGCgV686E3IyOvhADQBxgPAYJ5gQonXiv1uDvFRNr4m0TQV6h2GRr6yyMf2x xDjmErv7C7s+mZEooO7CCObQTNOqeKkAqLXjCxZ2xPT9OqqExcHXV4wCwlcvaGEx ckH7BT4s/ZvNEwXbhCuDlukVAV9/aACEkP5OChsKfJxDwSsdwFojhARrbknZc33E gULHf2mnmt8isLdEAssN5dgYZTO81dFoGjzslKp36MnHI4JE9QnmAcA1VwHAYitL aZ4uzNpsE29G2NHjo7exheeNmxxGoWsakegWIF54UPEK5uFpt0wxnGOdKCzTemp+ ooeQIM2D7fjmYhvb+74qG7xxd2ODc717vs1ggqs29BfsaXLLpPedBvHHZn8msHjQ aBCwrtgQkQ5Niu6lvJwAkWyqHczxSETPRKOfQPYU2vINvRITwjCwH8yrixfT6WaW RHhed9lRIY8= =6F5a -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2754759.TmvKnKBbG4-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list