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 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HrFYM-0007k2-Gq for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 24 May 2007 15:48:39 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l4OFlPWr006524; Thu, 24 May 2007 15:47:25 GMT Received: from desiato.localdomain (82-69-83-178.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk [82.69.83.178]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l4OFhHZJ001869 for ; Thu, 24 May 2007 15:43:17 GMT Received: from zaphod.digimed.co.uk (zaphod.digimed.co.uk [192.168.1.1]) by desiato.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCA7A134ADB for ; Thu, 24 May 2007 16:43:15 +0100 (BST) Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 16:43:10 +0100 From: Neil Bothwick To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] which -march flag to pick for Intel Core 2 Duo in make.conf? Message-ID: <20070524164310.46a03922@zaphod.digimed.co.uk> In-Reply-To: References: <642958cc0705240717s360e212er3f54e8636e5a06f1@mail.gmail.com> Organization: Digital Media Production X-Mailer: Claws Mail 2.9.2cvs13 (GTK+ 2.10.12; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-GPG-Fingerprint: 7260 0F33 97EC 2F1E 7667 FE37 BA6E 1A97 4375 1903 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_yVE_7gXS/2tyr6hJg/II5dP"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: 9ccd76f6-d370-474e-a7be-78b1b1f35325 X-Archives-Hash: e7d0843e5a5aedc97d40fb51a2da5b0e --Sig_yVE_7gXS/2tyr6hJg/II5dP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 24 May 2007 11:13:30 -0400, Denis wrote: > After reading some docs, the impression I get is that the 'nocona' > flag is for building a 64-bit system... For a 32-bit system, it seems > like 'prescott' would be the choice, wouldn't it? Yes. > We don't have gcc-4.2.0 in our portage available for installation yet, > do we? Anyone know when? When the devs consider it suitable for at least the testing branch or when you do "echo =3Dsys-devel/gcc-4.2*" >>/etc/portage/package.mask, whichever comes sooner. Bear in mind that GCC is almost certainly masked for good reason. It's not like you're using a binary distro and only need a compiler for a few packages. Feel free to try it in the knowledge that if it breaks your system, you get to keep the pieces. --=20 Neil Bothwick Sects, sects, sects, is that all you monks think about? --Sig_yVE_7gXS/2tyr6hJg/II5dP Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGVbKTum4al0N1GQMRAvMDAKCHb8kT0W5DhH/sUyBFwUxrND22QgCgkzwZ KZZb9DNpetNb0tvnwSYdsTQ= =KutI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_yVE_7gXS/2tyr6hJg/II5dP-- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list