On 2019-05-31 07:12 +0100, Ken Moffat via blfs-dev wrote:
> The threatened details of the first part of my investigation into
> the general subject of tuning (for packages which I normally build
> on my desktop systems) are now uploaded to
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~ken/tuning/ - this is mostly just a
> list of packages and versions, in the order in which I build them.
> Currently using '-O2 -march=native' or '-O3 -march=native' where the
> package defaults to -O3, and taking steps to ensure that -g is
> removed.  And a set of notes for differences in how I've achieved
> this.
> 
> No, I doubt that -march=native is generally worth using, but it
> does show if my CFLAGS or CXXFLAGS are getting used.
> 
> Also, some comments on a few packages, e.g. how to get perl to use
> flags, and how anything using qmake will use the flags qt uses, or
> has been forced to use.
> 
> My next stage is to look at what should be the first of the cheap
> hardening options, -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 : I have applied that to
> everything using gcc/g++ from the start of LFS chapter 6 **EXCEPT
> GLIBC** with currently one annoyance in c-ares (it wants defines in
> CPPFLAGS) and a total failure in boost, which is where I'm currently
> stalled.

I'm building my system with "-O3 -march=native -fipa-pta -fgraphite-
identity -floop-nest-optimize -falign-functions=32".   It's safe for
most packages (all packages following the ISO C/C++ standard,
theoratically) but also breaks several packages.

I'll try adding "-fno-common" next time (building LFS-8.5-rc with
Glibc-2.30) and write a note like you.

-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to