[gentoo-dev] Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[gentoo-dev] Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis]

I would like to suggest that default LDFLAGS in Gentoo contain the following
flags: "-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common".

-O1 enables some basic optimizations.
--hash-style=gnu causes that ld creates only new GNU-style hash tables.
--sort-common causes that ld sorts the common symbols by size when it places
them in the appropriate output sections.

These options don't cause any problems, so they should be less controversial
than --as-needed.
(These options don't conflict with --as-needed, so --as-needed can be still
added to default LDFLAGS, but this thread isn't about --as-needed.)

--
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Fabian Groffen]

On 24-06-2008 14:15:10 +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> I would like to suggest that default LDFLAGS in Gentoo contain the following
> flags: "-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common".
> 
> -O1 enables some basic optimizations.
> --hash-style=gnu causes that ld creates only new GNU-style hash tables.
> --sort-common causes that ld sorts the common symbols by size when it places
> them in the appropriate output sections.
> 
> These options don't cause any problems, so they should be less controversial
> than --as-needed.
> (These options don't conflict with --as-needed, so --as-needed can be still
> added to default LDFLAGS, but this thread isn't about --as-needed.)

as long as it doesn't go in /base, but in the linux/freebsd profiles
instead, it's fine with me.


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 362 bytes --]

Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> writes:

> as long as it doesn't go in /base, but in the linux/freebsd profiles
> instead, it's fine with me.

--has-style=gnu should not be used on non-GLIBC systems (I'm unsure
about uclibc, but I'd be surprised if they do implement the GNU style
hash).

-- 
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 196 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1355 bytes --]

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 14:17:48 +0200
Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On 24-06-2008 14:15:10 +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
> wrote:
> > I would like to suggest that default LDFLAGS in Gentoo contain the
> > following flags: "-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common".
> > 
> > -O1 enables some basic optimizations.
> > --hash-style=gnu causes that ld creates only new GNU-style hash
> > tables. --sort-common causes that ld sorts the common symbols by
> > size when it places them in the appropriate output sections.
> > 
> > These options don't cause any problems, so they should be less
> > controversial than --as-needed.
> > (These options don't conflict with --as-needed, so --as-needed can
> > be still added to default LDFLAGS, but this thread isn't about
> > --as-needed.)
> 
> as long as it doesn't go in /base, but in the linux/freebsd profiles
> instead, it's fine with me.

Ditto.  mips doesn't have support for .gnu.hash.

Currently --hash-style=both is set in the binutils patchset, not
the profiles so it's kind of a global setting.  Can the profiles
override it?

-- 
gcc-porting,                                      by design, by neglect
treecleaner,                              for a fact or just for effect
wxwidgets @ gentoo     EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis]

2008-06-25 06:16 Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@gentoo.org> napisał(a):
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 14:17:48 +0200
> Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
>> On 24-06-2008 14:15:10 +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
>> wrote:
>> > I would like to suggest that default LDFLAGS in Gentoo contain the
>> > following flags: "-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common".
>> >
>> > -O1 enables some basic optimizations.
>> > --hash-style=gnu causes that ld creates only new GNU-style hash
>> > tables. --sort-common causes that ld sorts the common symbols by
>> > size when it places them in the appropriate output sections.
>> >
>> > These options don't cause any problems, so they should be less
>> > controversial than --as-needed.
>> > (These options don't conflict with --as-needed, so --as-needed can
>> > be still added to default LDFLAGS, but this thread isn't about
>> > --as-needed.)
>>
>> as long as it doesn't go in /base, but in the linux/freebsd profiles
>> instead, it's fine with me.
>
> Ditto.  mips doesn't have support for .gnu.hash.
>
> Currently --hash-style=both is set in the binutils patchset, not
> the profiles so it's kind of a global setting.  Can the profiles
> override it?

AFAIK yes. You should be able to override it in make.defaults.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Petteri Räty]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 366 bytes --]

Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis kirjoitti:
> I would like to suggest that default LDFLAGS in Gentoo contain the following
> flags: "-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common".
> 
> -O1 enables some basic optimizations.
 >

At least adding -O1 should not be problematic. I think vapier was 
already suggesting this quite a while ago.

Regards,
Petteri


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 260 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 441 bytes --]

On Saturday 28 June 2008, Petteri Räty wrote:
> Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis kirjoitti:
> > I would like to suggest that default LDFLAGS in Gentoo contain the
> > following flags: "-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common".
> >
> > -O1 enables some basic optimizations.
>
> At least adding -O1 should not be problematic. I think vapier was
> already suggesting this quite a while ago.

imo -Wl,-O1 should go into base
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 835 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 555 bytes --]

On Tuesday 24 June 2008, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> writes:
> > as long as it doesn't go in /base, but in the linux/freebsd profiles
> > instead, it's fine with me.
>
> --has-style=gnu should not be used on non-GLIBC systems (I'm unsure
> about uclibc, but I'd be surprised if they do implement the GNU style
> hash).

why would you be surprised ?  the GNU hash style addresses a lot of issues 
with the SYSV one.  uClibc (well not the version in the tree) contains 
optional support for it.
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 835 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Fabian Groffen]

On 29-06-2008 07:29:57 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Saturday 28 June 2008, Petteri Räty wrote:
> > Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis kirjoitti:
> > > I would like to suggest that default LDFLAGS in Gentoo contain the
> > > following flags: "-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common".
> > >
> > > -O1 enables some basic optimizations.
> >
> > At least adding -O1 should not be problematic. I think vapier was
> > already suggesting this quite a while ago.
> 
> imo -Wl,-O1 should go into base

I prefer not.  Please only on profiles that use GNU binutils as linker.


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Donnie Berkholz]

On 23:15 Sun 29 Jun     , Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 29-06-2008 07:29:57 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Saturday 28 June 2008, Petteri Räty wrote:
> > > Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis kirjoitti:
> > > > I would like to suggest that default LDFLAGS in Gentoo contain the
> > > > following flags: "-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common".
> > > >
> > > > -O1 enables some basic optimizations.
> > >
> > > At least adding -O1 should not be problematic. I think vapier was
> > > already suggesting this quite a while ago.
> > 
> > imo -Wl,-O1 should go into base
> 
> I prefer not.  Please only on profiles that use GNU binutils as linker.

That's the rule, not the exception, so I think that profiles with 
non-gnu linkers should revert it.

Thanks,
Donnie
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Fabian Groffen]

On 29-06-2008 20:28:39 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 23:15 Sun 29 Jun     , Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > On 29-06-2008 07:29:57 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > On Saturday 28 June 2008, Petteri Räty wrote:
> > > > Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis kirjoitti:
> > > > > I would like to suggest that default LDFLAGS in Gentoo contain the
> > > > > following flags: "-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common".
> > > > >
> > > > > -O1 enables some basic optimizations.
> > > >
> > > > At least adding -O1 should not be problematic. I think vapier was
> > > > already suggesting this quite a while ago.
> > > 
> > > imo -Wl,-O1 should go into base
> > 
> > I prefer not.  Please only on profiles that use GNU binutils as linker.
> 
> That's the rule, not the exception, so I think that profiles with 
> non-gnu linkers should revert it.

In the current world of gentoo-x86 it is the rule.  But what will you do
once Sun Studio becomes open source, and you want to allow people that
like to have better performance to use it?  What if Gentoo Prefix ever
gets merged back into gentoo-x86?

How can you easily revert it in a profile?  Using strip-ldflags alike?
That feels nasty to me.  If it is trivial to remove it again,
considering there may be more in LDFLAGS, then it is less of a problem
to me.  Maybe there is such a way, and I just missed it.


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1363 bytes --]

2008-06-30 10:57:21 Fabian Groffen napisał(a):
> On 29-06-2008 20:28:39 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > On 23:15 Sun 29 Jun     , Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > > On 29-06-2008 07:29:57 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > > On Saturday 28 June 2008, Petteri Räty wrote:
> > > > > Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis kirjoitti:
> > > > > > I would like to suggest that default LDFLAGS in Gentoo contain the
> > > > > > following flags: "-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common".
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -O1 enables some basic optimizations.
> > > > >
> > > > > At least adding -O1 should not be problematic. I think vapier was
> > > > > already suggesting this quite a while ago.
> > > > 
> > > > imo -Wl,-O1 should go into base
> > > 
> > > I prefer not.  Please only on profiles that use GNU binutils as linker.
> > 
> > That's the rule, not the exception, so I think that profiles with 
> > non-gnu linkers should revert it.
> 
> In the current world of gentoo-x86 it is the rule.  But what will you do
> once Sun Studio becomes open source, and you want to allow people that
> like to have better performance to use it?  What if Gentoo Prefix ever
> gets merged back into gentoo-x86?
> 
> How can you easily revert it in a profile?

You can set LDFLAGS="" in a subprofiles's make.defaults.

-- 
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Fabian Groffen]

On 30-06-2008 17:35:08 +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> > How can you easily revert it in a profile?
> 
> You can set LDFLAGS="" in a subprofiles's make.defaults.

How elegant... but I guess I'll have no choice.


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Petteri Räty]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 544 bytes --]

Mike Frysinger kirjoitti:
> On Saturday 28 June 2008, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis kirjoitti:
>>> I would like to suggest that default LDFLAGS in Gentoo contain the
>>> following flags: "-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common".
>>>
>>> -O1 enables some basic optimizations.
>> At least adding -O1 should not be problematic. I think vapier was
>> already suggesting this quite a while ago.
> 
> imo -Wl,-O1 should go into base
> -mike

So seems like we should just do it (tm).

Regards,
Petteri


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 260 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 888 bytes --]

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 21:42:49 +0300
Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Mike Frysinger kirjoitti:
> > On Saturday 28 June 2008, Petteri Räty wrote:
> >> Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis kirjoitti:
> >>> I would like to suggest that default LDFLAGS in Gentoo contain the
> >>> following flags: "-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common".
> >>>
> >>> -O1 enables some basic optimizations.
> >> At least adding -O1 should not be problematic. I think vapier was
> >> already suggesting this quite a while ago.
> > 
> > imo -Wl,-O1 should go into base
> > -mike
> 
> So seems like we should just do it (tm).

Why not default/linux?


-- 
gcc-porting,                                      by design, by neglect
treecleaner,                              for a fact or just for effect
wxwidgets @ gentoo     EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Michael Haubenwallner]

On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 14:10 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 21:42:49 +0300
> Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > Mike Frysinger kirjoitti:

> > > imo -Wl,-O1 should go into base
> > > -mike
> > 
> > So seems like we should just do it (tm).
> 
> Why not default/linux?

Just wanted to ask the same...

/haubi/
-- 
Michael Haubenwallner
Gentoo on a different level

--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 318 bytes --]

Here's the updated version of my proposition:

default/linux: LDFLAGS="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"
default/linux/mips: LDFLAGS="-Wl,-O1,--sort-common"
hardened/linux: LDFLAGS="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"
uclibc: LDFLAGS="-Wl,-O1,--sort-common"

-- 
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Luca Barbato]

Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 30-06-2008 17:35:08 +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
>>> How can you easily revert it in a profile?
>> You can set LDFLAGS="" in a subprofiles's make.defaults.
> 
> How elegant... but I guess I'll have no choice.

Shouldn't possible have a subprofile with compiler/linker specifics and 
move there non sharable stuff and keep base leaner?

lu

-- 

Luca Barbato
Gentoo Council Member
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero

-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Doug Goldstein]

Luca Barbato wrote:
> Fabian Groffen wrote:
>> On 30-06-2008 17:35:08 +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
>>>> How can you easily revert it in a profile?
>>> You can set LDFLAGS="" in a subprofiles's make.defaults.
>>
>> How elegant... but I guess I'll have no choice.
>
> Shouldn't possible have a subprofile with compiler/linker specifics 
> and move there non sharable stuff and keep base leaner?
>
> lu
>
I'm just going to commit this to default/linux in about 20 minutes -Wl,-O1
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 855 bytes --]

2008-07-09 15:45:15 Doug Goldstein napisał(a):
> Luca Barbato wrote:
> > Fabian Groffen wrote:
> >> On 30-06-2008 17:35:08 +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> >>>> How can you easily revert it in a profile?
> >>> You can set LDFLAGS="" in a subprofiles's make.defaults.
> >>
> >> How elegant... but I guess I'll have no choice.
> >
> > Shouldn't possible have a subprofile with compiler/linker specifics 
> > and move there non sharable stuff and keep base leaner?
> >
> > lu
> >
> I'm just going to commit this to default/linux in about 20 minutes -Wl,-O1

Cardoe informed me that he planned to add --hash-style=gnu and --sort-common
to default LDFLAGS in the future.

Does anybody know any packages / architectures (except mips) which have any
problems with these flags?

-- 
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1374 bytes --]

On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 21:15:32 +0200
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <arfrever.fta@gmail.com> wrote:

> 2008-07-09 15:45:15 Doug Goldstein napisał(a):
> > Luca Barbato wrote:
> > > Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > >> On 30-06-2008 17:35:08 +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar
> > >> Arahesis wrote:
> > >>>> How can you easily revert it in a profile?
> > >>> You can set LDFLAGS="" in a subprofiles's make.defaults.
> > >>
> > >> How elegant... but I guess I'll have no choice.
> > >
> > > Shouldn't possible have a subprofile with compiler/linker
> > > specifics and move there non sharable stuff and keep base leaner?
> > >
> > > lu
> > >
> > I'm just going to commit this to default/linux in about 20 minutes
> > -Wl,-O1
> 
> Cardoe informed me that he planned to add --hash-style=gnu and
> --sort-common to default LDFLAGS in the future.
> 
> Does anybody know any packages / architectures (except mips) which
> have any problems with these flags?

We have versions of glibc pre-2.5 that don't have support
for .gnu.hash.  Can we set a minimum version in the profiles?

No one should be using them, but you never know.

-- 
gcc-porting,                                      by design, by neglect
treecleaner,                              for a fact or just for effect
wxwidgets @ gentoo     EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1471 bytes --]

2008-07-10 05:47:28 Ryan Hill napisał(a):
> On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 21:15:32 +0200
> Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <arfrever.fta@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > 2008-07-09 15:45:15 Doug Goldstein napisał(a):
> > > Luca Barbato wrote:
> > > > Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > > >> On 30-06-2008 17:35:08 +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar
> > > >> Arahesis wrote:
> > > >>>> How can you easily revert it in a profile?
> > > >>> You can set LDFLAGS="" in a subprofiles's make.defaults.
> > > >>
> > > >> How elegant... but I guess I'll have no choice.
> > > >
> > > > Shouldn't possible have a subprofile with compiler/linker
> > > > specifics and move there non sharable stuff and keep base leaner?
> > > >
> > > > lu
> > > >
> > > I'm just going to commit this to default/linux in about 20 minutes
> > > -Wl,-O1
> > 
> > Cardoe informed me that he planned to add --hash-style=gnu and
> > --sort-common to default LDFLAGS in the future.
> > 
> > Does anybody know any packages / architectures (except mips) which
> > have any problems with these flags?
> 
> We have versions of glibc pre-2.5 that don't have support
> for .gnu.hash.  Can we set a minimum version in the profiles?

Yes.

You can also add the following code to profiles/default/linux/profile.bashrc
or profiles/base/profile.bashrc:

if has_version "<sys-libs/glibc-2.5" ; then
        LDFLAGS="${LDFLAGS//-Wl,--hash-style=gnu/}"
fi

-- 
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggested default LDFLAGS+="-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common"

[Javier Villavicencio]

Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
| 2008-07-09 15:45:15 Doug Goldstein napisał(a):
|> Luca Barbato wrote:
|>> Fabian Groffen wrote:
|>>> On 30-06-2008 17:35:08 +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
wrote:
|>>>>> How can you easily revert it in a profile?
|>>>> You can set LDFLAGS="" in a subprofiles's make.defaults.
|>>> How elegant... but I guess I'll have no choice.
|>> Shouldn't possible have a subprofile with compiler/linker specifics
|>> and move there non sharable stuff and keep base leaner?
|>>
|>> lu
|>>
|> I'm just going to commit this to default/linux in about 20 minutes
- -Wl,-O1
|
| Cardoe informed me that he planned to add --hash-style=gnu and
- --sort-common
| to default LDFLAGS in the future.
|
| Does anybody know any packages / architectures (except mips) which
have any
| problems with these flags?
|

Sorry I'm late.

This is for BSDs if anyone is interested:

* --hash-style=gnu doesn't work.
* --sort-common has no problems.
* -O1 makes a bit difficult (if not impossible) to obtain decent
backtraces while debugging certain things.



<unimportant side story>
While -O1 works just fine for everything I've tested so far, if
something fails and you want a backtrace out of a coredump or while
debugging a binary, you may only get the last call, everything else on
the stack is lost in 0xffffffff limbo.
I experienced this while debugging a stack overflow in Python's cPickle,
which could be the reason for this behavior (stack gone wild), but
removing -O1 made decent dumps/traces.
Of course I shouldn't have been debugging things with -Wl,-O1 in the
first place but oh well :+)
</>

-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list