Stefano D'Angelo wrote: >>> I'd say package format (.rpm, .deb, etc), OS distribution (Ubuntu, >>> OpenSUSE, etc.), CPU architecture (ix86, x86_64, etc.) >> I guess one could think of adding the subarchitecture (as in: p3, p4) >> and optimization target too. The difference between subarchitecture and >> optimization target would be same as difference between -mcpu and -mtune >> gcc options. > Well... yes. But I don't know if it would work well with a regular > package manager (in terms of packaging work, updates, etc.).
You may be right - it would indeed complicate packaging, and the speed gain is not that spectacular. Maybe providing the list of optimization options (-O, -mcpu, -mtune, -ffast-math etc.) as a string would be kind of beneficial (letting the advanced users know if they want to compile the packages on their own). Or maybe nobody would use it. I really can't tell. Krzysztof _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-dev
