On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
> > On Wednesday 23 August 2006 22:22, Michael Hennebry wrote:
> >>> Oh, and BTW, on gentoo your optimization choices for gcc are -O, -O2
> >>> or nothing, because all other -O options are replaced with -O2 by
> >>> toolchain.eclass.
Perhaps I misunderstood the preceeding.
I'd taken it to mean that recompiling any package with gentoo tools
would result in -Os being replaced by -O2 .
> >> Since the OP wanted -Os, the question remains:
> >> How, if at all, can he get -Os ?
> >
> > Assuming that the OP doesn't want a broken gcc he will probably be happy
> > with -Os for the packages that doesn't break with it... ;)
What would break with -Os that wouldn't break with -O2?
I was under the impression that both flags only allowed
changes that didn't affect the output.
> Being the OP in this case, I want to state that I didn't want "-Os for
> all pkgs". I just decided to set "-Os" inside my CFLAGS, and I am
> perfectly happy with any working gcc resulting from this.
A statement quoted above suggested to me that
you were unlikely to get -Os for anything.
> This isn't only about control, this is also about trust:
> I may control which settings to use for any pkg, but then I also have to
> trust the decisions of the maintainers which choices they made for
> individual pkgs (apart from overriding their settings, which somehow
> questions the usage of portage IMO).
>
> In fact, from my point of view, I am *allowed* to trust in this.
--
Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"it stands to reason that they weren't always called the ancients."
-- Daniel Jackson
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
