On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 05:30:24 +0200
Jeroen Roovers j...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:05:19 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
You appear to be assuming that those pushing the --as-needed
solution have it finished. This is far from the case. There's still
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 08:23:40AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 05:30:24 +0200
Jeroen Roovers j...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:05:19 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
You appear to be assuming that those pushing the --as-needed
On Monday 28 June 2010 02:09:44 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
Hello everyone,
I'm sure at least half of you are thinking Oh no, not this again...,
and I agree. However, I'm /also/ thinking Why the heck haven't we
done this yet?
[...]
/If/ you're¹ going to insist on doing this, could you please
On Tuesday 29 June 2010 09:46:52 Alex Alexander wrote:
If the community feels their choice, albeit not perfect, will help the
project, you have to respect that. That is, if you want to be part of the
community :)
I see your point to some extent, but the concern is that such decisions might
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 06:25:50PM +0100, David Leverton wrote:
On Tuesday 29 June 2010 09:46:52 Alex Alexander wrote:
If the community feels their choice, albeit not perfect, will help the
project, you have to respect that. That is, if you want to be part of the
community :)
I see your
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 06:39:44 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan nirbh...@gentoo.org wrote:
There's a tracker bug for this, and the problems still remaining are:
http://bugs.gentoo.org/showdependencytree.cgi?id=129413hide_resolved=1
You've forgotten make --as-needed not break correct code by making the
On 06/28/2010 10:35 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 06:39:44 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan nirbh...@gentoo.org wrote:
There's a tracker bug for this, and the problems still remaining are:
http://bugs.gentoo.org/showdependencytree.cgi?id=129413hide_resolved=1
You've forgotten make
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 10:44:54 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
You've forgotten make --as-needed not break correct code by making
the linker ignore explicit instructions from a program author to
link two things together. Until you do that, --as-needed is in the
same
On 06/28/2010 10:51 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 10:44:54 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
You've forgotten make --as-needed not break correct code by making
the linker ignore explicit instructions from a program author to
link two things together. Until you
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 06/28/2010 10:51 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Will Gentoo be doing the same for -Ofast and its flags then? After all,
most packages work with them, and you can't let the few packages that
require standard-compliant
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 11:08:22 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
This is not about optimizing but preventing clear breakage, the
benefits of asneeded are not under debate here (like already stated
in the original message this thread started from)
--as-needed does not prevent
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 06:39:44AM +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
What needs to be done now is for someone with lots of CPU power to
grab the list of packages[1], and build them one-by-one (all
versions), adding to a new list all the ebuilds that fail. How to
test:
LDFLAGS=-Wl,--as-needed
El lun, 28-06-2010 a las 06:39 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan escribió:
Hello everyone,
I'm sure at least half of you are thinking Oh no, not this again...,
and I agree. However, I'm /also/ thinking Why the heck haven't we
done this yet?
We've been discussing this since 2008, and probably waaay
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 06:39:44AM +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
What needs to be done now is for someone with lots of CPU power to
grab the list of packages[1], and build them one-by-one (all
versions), adding to a
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 06:39:44AM +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
Hello everyone,
...
What needs to be done now is for someone with lots of CPU power to
grab the list of packages[1], and build them one-by-one (all
versions), adding to a new list all the ebuilds that fail. How to
test:
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 01:40:46PM +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 06/28/2010 10:51 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Will Gentoo be doing the same for -Ofast and its flags then? After all,
most packages work with them,
On 2010.06.28 14:43, Thomas Anderson wrote:
[snip]
Not taking technical sides in this thread simply because I have no
time to
argue it at length, BUT:
Simply because a topic has been discussed to *death* does not
mean
the
correct answer was obtained, only that a majority agree
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:59:21 +0100
Roy Bamford neddyseag...@gentoo.org wrote:
All of engineering involves compromise.
It's not a question of compromise. It's a question of being right vs
being wrong. If one person says that 2 + 2 = 4 and a loud mob screams
that their prophet revealed to them in
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:05:19 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
You appear to be assuming that those pushing the --as-needed solution
have it finished. This is far from the case. There's still a lot of
work that would need to be done, and that work will have to be
Hello everyone,
I'm sure at least half of you are thinking Oh no, not this again...,
and I agree. However, I'm /also/ thinking Why the heck haven't we
done this yet?
We've been discussing this since 2008, and probably waaay before that
too. The entire discussion about whether we should do this
20 matches
Mail list logo