On Nov 12, 2012, at 12:53 AM, Erik Cederstrand wrote: > Den 09/11/2012 kl. 16.22 skrev Erik Cederstrand <[email protected]>: > >> Den 09/11/2012 kl. 15.36 skrev Warner Losh <[email protected]>: >> >>> On Nov 9, 2012, at 3:52 AM, Erik Cederstrand wrote: >>> >>>> Hello toolchainers, >>>> >>>> I'm attempting to clean up hardcoded ar(1) flags in the tree to use the >>>> global ARFLAGS in share/mk/sys.mk instead. I want to be able to add "-D" >>>> to ARFLAGS and have it used everywhere. >>>> >>>> The patch changes some hardcoded flags from e.g. "cru" to the default "rl" >>>> or "rv" from sys.mk. Looking at the manpage for ar(1), I'm pretty sure >>>> this is safe, and my runtime tests haven't turned out any problems. >>>> Loosing the "u" flags means loosing a bit in performance in theory, but I >>>> have tested this to be negligible in a buildworld / kernel run. In a later >>>> iteration, maybe the default flags can be added a "u". >>>> >>>> Are there any problems with this patch? >>> >>> I don't like losing the 'c' flag. Makes things in the build too whiny. >>> Why purposely lose the 'u' flag that you know helps performance? >>> Why move from cq to rl? This can be a big slow down... >> >> I'd actually like to add both 'u' and 'c', I just didn't want to both clean >> up and change the default in the same patch. A followup patch could be: > > If there are no other objections, I'll try to both patches into the tree (I > have no commit bit myself).
You haven't answered my objections, so not yet. I haven't had a chance to see if this message actually answers my concerns though (my life has been busy). Warner _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-toolchain To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
