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 1HbZjN-0001RL-PO for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 11 Apr 2007 10:07:14 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l3BA4uOQ004233; Wed, 11 Apr 2007 10:04:56 GMT Received: from mail.ilievnet.com ([84.21.204.200]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l3B9xOGC027906 for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2007 09:59:24 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.ilievnet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6493C83C61 for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2007 12:40:05 +0300 (EEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new 2.4.1 (20060508) at ilievnet.com Received: from mail.ilievnet.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ilievnet.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WNY6O4Yy1C08 for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2007 12:39:51 +0300 (EEST) Received: from ilievnet.com (ilievnet.com [10.0.1.11]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: danny@ilievnet.com) by mail.ilievnet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4108883C60 for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2007 12:39:51 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <461CACE6.7020701@ilievnet.com> Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 12:39:50 +0300 From: Daniel Iliev User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-GB; rv:1.8.1.2) Gecko/20070302 MultiZilla/1.8.3.0a SeaMonkey/1.1.1 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 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: CFLAGS "...-O3 -pipe" vs "...O2 " References: <410166.43467.qm@web31703.mail.mud.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <410166.43467.qm@web31703.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 0a88df04-f3a7-4211-ba16-0e7177b5aca6 X-Archives-Hash: ddf0bc85327c07b73eaea962128450c4 maxim wexler wrote: > > Too late. Damage done. I decided to go with the > example make.conf which call the O3 level "decent". > >> -- >> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list >> >> >> Exactly what kind of damage are you talking about? Don't you think if there was a real problem with -O3, gentoo devs would have excluded it as an option, especially when they have an easy to apply mechanism for doing that (I have in mind the "filter-flags" && "replace-flags" functions in the ebuilds)? All of my gentoo systems were build using -O3 and I haven't met a single problem with this setting. Of course there are packages (like the already mentioned OO2 and some others) which won't build with extreme optimization and the devs have taken care of this by forcing appropriate C(XX)FLAGS. It is my opinion that the statements like "-O3 is wrong and can do damage" is nothing but FUD. It is questionable if "-O3" helps building faster packages than those built with "-O2" but for sure it won't do damage. -- Best regards, Daniel -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list