From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1N3mSR-00029a-Gk for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 08:03:39 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AEBCDE0738; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 08:03:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from static.21.48.46.78.clients.your-server.de (static.21.48.46.78.clients.your-server.de [78.46.48.21]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A134E0738 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 08:03:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by static.21.48.46.78.clients.your-server.de (Postfix, from userid 1007) id 7EC6C173520; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 09:03:36 +0100 (CET) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.1 (2007-05-02) on 0815-web.localdomain X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,NO_RECEIVED, NO_RELAYS,USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=ham version=3.2.1 Message-ID: <4AEA9DD2.7080807@j-schmitz.net> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 09:03:30 +0100 From: Justin User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20091006) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Linux Magazine tests Gentoo performance References: <4AEA0DA2.8000009@kutulu.org> In-Reply-To: <4AEA0DA2.8000009@kutulu.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigFD6D3BC016E4CA9BADA7BBE7" X-Archives-Salt: bb2b6590-cbb7-4386-ae5c-2ad26a939a9e X-Archives-Hash: 6b1a930a1896dce76c75f6d62724c7e1 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigFD6D3BC016E4CA9BADA7BBE7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mike Edenfield schrieb: > On 10/29/2009 5:13 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: >> On 10/29/2009 10:45 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: >>> I suppose this is interesting to most Gentoo users. Linux Magazine >>> performed a detailed benchmark of Gentoo, comparing it to Ubuntu 9.04= : >>> >>> http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7574/1 >> >> Btw, I think this is a very nice example of why per-package CFLAGS wou= ld >> have been very useful. Some application largely benefit from -Os, othe= rs >> from -O2. >=20 > If you're willing to put in a bit of effort, I believe you can set up a= > per-package environment (including custom CFLAGS) in a number of ways. > The one that seems to be most popular is described here: >=20 > http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org/msg0058= 5.html >=20 >=20 >=20 I am using a much simpler (for me thing). Just create for every package you like to change things a kind of pseudo make.conf in /etc/portage/env/CAT/ There you can change everything on package basis, not only FLAGS, but also FEATURES etc. --------------enigFD6D3BC016E4CA9BADA7BBE7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkrqndMACgkQgAnW8HDreRZI4wCeJ77FJZdyoBwhcPzMbDHCOPXE ol8An1U6DIj0ClzmXtNA9ait9WYWjII7 =+9Yn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigFD6D3BC016E4CA9BADA7BBE7--