On Sat, Jul 10, 2004 at 02:03:39PM +0200, Martin Costabel wrote: > > So the discussion about different optimization options needs to get away > from general defaults and focus on individual packages. There may be > some packages where different optimizations for G4 and G5 might make > sense. [...] > Another example: The atlas package, whose sole purpose in life is > optimization. If you build atlas, it optimizes itself for the machine on > which you compile it, so you get different results for G3, G4, and G5, > maybe even for subtypes, and different results depending on some > interactive compile-time choices. If Fink's > same-deb-no-matter-where-it-was-built policy were applied to this > package, it would either become useless or we would need different > variants, atlas-G3, atlas-G4, atlas-G5, and maybe atlas-G5-dual-1.8, > atlas-G5-dual-2.5 and so on. Nobody in their right mind would suggest > such a scenario.
On the contrary! By the current situation, then, it sounds like a binary install of the atlas package (i.e., downloaded .deb) will only "work" for 1/x of the users, and the population for whom it will work is both unknown and subject to change. dan -- Daniel Macks [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.netspace.org/~dmacks ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com _______________________________________________ Fink-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users
