Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?)

[Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1435 bytes --]

On Fri, 30 May 2008 15:07:43 -0700
Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 22:53 Fri 30 May     , Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Sat, 31 May 2008 00:47:44 +0300
> > Mart Raudsepp <leio@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > > The story that matters here is, that a C++ corner case that does
> > > not work on 0.01% of packages with --as-needed and breaks on
> > > non-ELF platforms, should not cause good things for our users to
> > > be shot down.
> > 
> > You could say the same thing for -ffast-math...
> 
> When there's a feature that only breaks one package that we know of, 
> wouldn't it make more sense to enable it globally and add an
> exception than to do it the other way around?

Both -ffast-math and --as-needed make the compiler / linker violate
various standards in ways that can't be used safely unless a package
has been explicitly designed to work with it. For packages that have
been explicitly designed to work with either, upstream can add the
options to the build system themselves. For packages that haven't, it's
not Gentoo's place to try to guess whether upstream has designed their
software with ricer flags in mind, and whether if it works by fluke
now it'll still work in the next version.

> I see that a number of packages in the tree explicitly filter 
> -ffast-math.

That's mostly from the bad old days when users were encouraged to use
silly CFLAGS...

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]