On Apr 16, 2007, at 11:30 AM, Tushar Teredesai wrote: > On 4/13/07, William Harrington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I will answer your question. LFS.. BLFS.. wherever you >> start your >> optimization, whatever depends on that later, will use those >> optimizations. Why you tend to believe to start with optimizations >> with BLFS is questionable. Things are linked dynamically, mostly, in >> LFS and BLFS. Optimizations that are introduced to libraries will be >> used in the future with binaries and other libs that link to them. > > AFAIK, that is not correct. The options you pass to the compiler are > used for optimizing the code that is compiled. This does not affect > the optimization of the binaries that are built down the line. For > example, if you build glibc with -Os and then build the package > coreutils with -O2, the coreutils executables will be built with -O2, > not -Os > > In addition to compiler optimization, one can also use linker > optimization (LDFLAGS=-0n). > > -- > Tushar Teredesai > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/ > -- > http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support > FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html > Unsubscribe: See the above information page >
Binaries, that link to libs that are optimized, will use the optimized code the library provides. That is what was meant. Which means if you optimize a library, problems could arise where segmentation faults occur from that library and not from the binary itself. Sincerely, William Harrington -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
