From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-user+bounces-180798-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 942B31396D9
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 17:39:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E663BE0EDC;
	Wed, 15 Nov 2017 17:39:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F63EE0EA3
	for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 17:39:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [10.1.1.204] (vpn1.metro-data.com [65.213.236.242])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	(Authenticated sender: mjo)
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9EDB033C6B6
	for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 17:39:34 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: memset_s
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
References: <CAKpSnpJ=vs36FjA6qRpFCYTZKreFdqe=bMqa9+kbZCL0FL7fDQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <26501197.ioODuGg76y@thetick>
 <CAKpSnpJ-FrOBttWNbOqiDxNLnQ5kTsHAbTNgZvRUSgL4hUxb=w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAD4mYj8foKjO7LShWcdttm7NSPEfo8pnj1TavVjxyAZSSRmmA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKpSnp+jw=Xdq7V4ZZDzdFb7GMTb+ES7Mxq2PwQH-EcVqBHhdA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKpSnpJ0NHBnzj6ggEkx4TG36oNFBk7k=UoKxHC+5Wmw7029Kg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAD4mYhWmDwrosnDjhb_6zNNKyqoLvf2CpVat47U9FQ2sma3ZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <ouhmfc$m1b$1@blaine.gmane.org>
 <CAAD4mYjBDxDNL4EW64xV_=Dwr=xZO7Qbs9dDmM_H=xj_0cvvOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKpSnpKnNG77_ESNLJHwOoHetvs_rXs31mPfvEcV52s=sYnRPA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Michael Orlitzky <mjo@gentoo.org>
Message-ID: <996c1436-ed56-6ad7-1c68-d4ebed42da1f@gentoo.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 12:39:23 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.3.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAKpSnpKnNG77_ESNLJHwOoHetvs_rXs31mPfvEcV52s=sYnRPA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: 2805100b-3790-4317-b37a-f4a1e9285528
X-Archives-Hash: 944dc96c4795cd23c3a0bab7b599eb73

On 11/15/2017 10:50 AM, Jorge Almeida wrote:
>
> Are you really sure? I was under the impression that ebuilds did it,
> and I find that natural. I didn't view that as a bug at all.


On principle, most things in the tree should respect whatever CFLAGS,
LDFLAGS, etc. you ask for. The problems resulting from that are
predictable: if you add "-ffast-math" to your CFLAGS and then start
getting crashes; well, you asked for it. We're not going to fix that for
you in every ebuild.

On the other hand, there are packages where some optimizations fail due
to a compiler bug or something else that is not by design. Some packages
optimize their critical path in assembly, and the resulting code doesn't
play well with otherwise-reasonable CFLAGS. In cases like those, it's
often simpler to disable the problematic flag in the ebuild rather than
have a thousand people do the same thing locally.