----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Kadzban" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "LFS Developers Mailinglist" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 1:15 PM Subject: Re: Thoughts
> And I do call it an optimization, simply because it makes stuff run > faster. That's what an optimization does. The fact that gcc by > default > now uses -O1 or -O2 (I think -O1) doesn't really mean that -O1 isn't > an >optimization -- any level (other than -O0) is an optimization. All the > levels are supposed to make your program run faster. > The fact that *SUPPORT* for --hash-style is going to become standard > doesn't really affect anything, either, because the standard > hash-style > (as far as I know) is *not* going to change to gnu. You will have to > give ld an option to make it use the gnu hash style. Therefore, when > linking a particular library or binary, it will always be an option to > use it or not. Hi Bryan. Maybe I expressed in a wrong way. Literally speaking *is* an optimization, what I meant was that probably gcc-4.3.0 will use it by default and in this sense I said I don't call it an optimization; really it will become (at least it seems so) a default optimization. Anyway if one wishes to use the "old" style it's simple as passing "hash-style=sysv", which is passed to the linker or "both" to have code supporting the two styles. I built succesfully LFS-6.2 from Fedora Core 6/Fedora 7 hosts without using the -B option. Luca -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
