From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 367FF1396D9 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 21:43:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2B3E2E0F15; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 21:43:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blaine.gmane.org (unknown [195.159.176.226]) (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 BE2E2E0EC7 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 21:43:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eF5SM-0007dv-UC for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 22:42:50 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: Grant Edwards Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: memset_s Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 21:42:42 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <26501197.ioODuGg76y@thetick> X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org User-Agent: slrn/1.0.2 (Linux) 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 X-Archives-Salt: 52243466-0b73-4465-bf05-41b1af74e65e X-Archives-Hash: 88eec011644f16ed7a59f30952a358c7 On 2017-11-15, R0b0t1 wrote: > Apologies for the double post, > > On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 9:41 AM, R0b0t1 wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 1:22 AM, Jorge Almeida wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 8:42 PM, R0b0t1 wrote: >>>> What I am wondering about is if C code which uses >>>> __attribute__((optimize(...))) is against Gentoo package standards and >>>> would have to be removed from the Portage tree. >>>> >>> >>> >>> You can set your optimization preferences in make.conf, and still an >>> ebuild will override them if deemed unsafe. What would be the >>> difference? >>> >> >> Ebuilds are not supposed to do this, so if you file a bug report >> citing that ebuild changes will be made (eventually?) to work around >> it. >> >> >> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Grant Edwards >> wrote: >>> On 2017-11-15, R0b0t1 wrote: >>> >>>> What I am wondering about is if C code which uses >>>> __attribute__((optimize(...))) is against Gentoo package standards and >>>> would have to be removed from the Portage tree. >>> >>> Huh? >>> >>> Gentoo enforces standards for the source code of packages? >>> >>> "They" review the source code for the Linux kernel, Gnome, KDE, Qt, >>> Chrome, Firefox, GCC, and 24670 thousand other packages and make sure >>> they all follow Gentoo coding standards? >>> >> >> To be consistent they would have to. Why I bring it up is that a >> number of optimizations in eix were removed due to the logic I gave >> above, despite there being no way to enable them without setting "-O3" >> globally. >> >> Cheers, >> R0b0t1 > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/632315 I don't see how that's relevent. That bug is about use flags and ebuild stuff, not about the C code inside a package's source files. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! Half a mind is a at terrible thing to waste! gmail.com