From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=DMARC_NONE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from volumehost.com (volumehost.com [216.63.158.9]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35AEE20F0CFB for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2002 15:08:15 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (jhhudso@localhost) by volumehost.com (8.11.6/linuxconf) with ESMTP id g35IwYk05547 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2002 12:58:34 -0600 Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 12:58:33 -0600 (CST) From: "Jared H. Hudson" To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] new ebuild variables proposal... In-Reply-To: <3CADD925.9010509@disinformation.ca> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux developer list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Archives-Salt: 4ef6fd53-69ec-4838-b212-ea80d3e8f4c6 X-Archives-Hash: 6c78f469155e1ca3469a115567f862ab Most ebuilds for packages that are picky about optimization settings, set their own CFLAGS & CXXFLAGS. If you will post what package you tried to compile and could not due to a CFLAGS setting, it would help us. For example, if you look at the glibc ebuild you will find that CFLAGS is set to -O2 instead of the possible default of -O3, because linuxthreads which is part of glibc won't compile with -O3 apparently. Personally, I feel this is the right way to handle this. Otherwise, just having a BAD_CFLAGS variable takes away optimizations from programs which might have a problem with 1 but not all optimization flags. -Jared H. On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Zach Forrest wrote: > I've been working on an ebuild recently and the package won't compile > with the '-funroll-loops' compiler flag. It might be nice to have a > couple of variables such as 'BAD_CFLAGS' and 'BAD_CXXFLAGS' that would > tell portage to remove these compiler flags for a particular ebuild. > This would provide a uniform way to deal with any similar problems > without someone having to modify their optimization settings for one ebuild. > > Any thoughts? > > Zach > > _______________________________________________ > gentoo-dev mailing list > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org > http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev > -- Using the internet as it was originally intended... for the further research of pornography and pipebombs.