David W Noon schrieb:
> You need to consider CHOST as well, to ensure you make the most of the
> newer CPUs.
>
> Here is what I use on an E6600 machine:
>
> CHOST="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu"
> CFLAGS="-march=nocona -mmmx -m3dnow -msse -msse2 -msse3 -mfpmath=sse,387 -O2
> -pipe"
>
> Note that -fomit-
On Saturday 10 Nov 2007 00:30 in article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
of linux.gentoo.user, Stefan G. Weichinger([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Greets, I recently bought a new CPU for my mythtv-box, it's a Pentium
> Dual E2160
>
> Currently I use
>
> CFLAGS="-O2 -march=pentium4 -pipe -fomit-frame-point
On Nov 10, 2007 12:19 AM, Stefan G. Weichinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Greets, I recently bought a new CPU for my mythtv-box, it's a Pentium
> Dual E2160
>
> Currently I use
>
> CFLAGS="-O2 -march=pentium4 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer"
>
> as I moved the system over from a Pentium 4 (whic
Greets, I recently bought a new CPU for my mythtv-box, it's a Pentium
Dual E2160
Currently I use
CFLAGS="-O2 -march=pentium4 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer"
as I moved the system over from a Pentium 4 (which just crashed).
Things work fine so far, I checked google and
http://gentoo-wiki.com/S
Hello Andrey Gerasimenko,
> Ideally you should measure compile times for large projects like Open
> Office and find out what works best on your system. I would start with
> 1 thread -O2 and -pipe.
That would be an incredible waste of time because the OOo build replaces
any -O? CFLAG with -O2. I
On Mon, 09 Apr 2007 05:48:07 +0400, maxim wexler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi group,
I note two schools of thought on the best CFLAGS for
the Pentium III processor.
One suggests using -O3 -pipe, the other, -O2 without
the pipe.
How much difference does this make? Is the extra level
of opti
> One suggests using -O3 -pipe, the other, -O2 without
> the pipe.
>
> How much difference does this make? Is the extra level
> of optimization with pipe the equivalent of the lower
> level without?
From the gcc manpage:
-pipe
Use pipes rather than temporary files for communication between the var
Hi group,
I note two schools of thought on the best CFLAGS for
the Pentium III processor.
One suggests using -O3 -pipe, the other, -O2 without
the pipe.
How much difference does this make? Is the extra level
of optimization with pipe the equivalent of the lower
level without?
-mw
__
On Tue, 19 Dec 2006, Jakob wrote:
> > Its funny till yesterday I didnt even know It supports 64bit ;-)
Any Pentium D (or higher) CPU supports 64bit.
> for now I will stick with 32bit, I think I will Install 64bit to
> another partition in some weeks
The other option is to have a pure 64bit syst
On Wednesday 20 December 2006 07:43, Andrew Gaydenko wrote:
> Is there a tool to query a portage to get a list of all packages which
> have 'testing' or 'stable' status for x86 and have 'not available' or
> 'hard masked' status for amd64?
sys-apps/paludis 0.12 with the ruby USE flag enabled contai
Is there a tool to query a portage to get a list of all packages which
have 'testing' or 'stable' status for x86 and have 'not available' or
'hard masked' status for amd64?
=== On Wednesday 20 December 2006 01:38, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
===
...
> Is it smart to hope "Gentoo AMD64 F
On Tuesday 19 December 2006 18:56, "W.Kenworthy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
about 'Re: [gentoo-user] CFLAGS Core2Duo':
> Is it still the case thats its impossible to upgrade a 32bit gentoo on
> athlon64 to 64 bit - requires a full reinstall?
Reinstall is the
On Tue, 2006-12-19 at 21:58 +0100, Jakob wrote:
> On 12/19/06, Jakob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 12/19/06, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 19 December 2006 13:48, Jakob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
...
> for now I will stick with 32bit, I think I will Install 6
On 12/19/06, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 19 December 2006 14:46, Andrew Gaydenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
about 'Re: [gentoo-user] CFLAGS Core2Duo':
> What is your "strategical vision" to this (use C2D as 32-bit or
> 64-bit)
On Tuesday 19 December 2006 14:46, Andrew Gaydenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
about 'Re: [gentoo-user] CFLAGS Core2Duo':
> What is your "strategical vision" to this (use C2D as 32-bit or
> 64-bit) alternatives?
All (well, very nearly all) the software I need
On Tuesday 19 December 2006 14:56, Jakob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
about 'Re: [gentoo-user] CFLAGS Core2Duo':
> do I have to run emerge -avuD world after changing to -march=prescott?
No, that's not required.
--
"If there's one thing we've established over
On 12/19/06, Jakob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/19/06, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 December 2006 13:48, Jakob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> about 'Re: [gentoo-user] CFLAGS Core2Duo':
> > Thaks for the quick reply.
&
On 12/19/06, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 19 December 2006 13:48, Jakob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
about 'Re: [gentoo-user] CFLAGS Core2Duo':
> Thaks for the quick reply.
> On http://gentoo-wiki.com/Safe_Cflags they say for 32bit use:
&
What is your "strategical vision" to this (use C2D as 32-bit or
64-bit) alternatives? Is it smart to hope "Gentoo AMD64 FAQ" will
be thiner and thiner during upcoming months? :-)
=== On Tuesday 19 December 2006 23:13, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: ===
... Of course, it's
getting harder a
On Tuesday 19 December 2006 13:48, Jakob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
about 'Re: [gentoo-user] CFLAGS Core2Duo':
> Thaks for the quick reply.
> On http://gentoo-wiki.com/Safe_Cflags they say for 32bit use:
> CFLAGS="-march=prescott -O2 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer"
On 12/19/06, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 19 December 2006 13:18, Jakob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
about '[gentoo-user] CFLAGS Core2Duo':
> I have a Core2Duo T5600 1,83 MHz in my notebook. Today I read on the
> GentooWeeklyNewsletter t
On Tuesday 19 December 2006 13:18, Jakob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
about '[gentoo-user] CFLAGS Core2Duo':
> I have a Core2Duo T5600 1,83 MHz in my notebook. Today I read on the
> GentooWeeklyNewsletter to use "-march=nocona (and an amd64 profile) for
> Core 2 Solo/D
Hi all,
I have a Core2Duo T5600 1,83 MHz in my notebook. Today I read on the
GentooWeeklyNewsletter to use "-march=nocona (and an amd64 profile) for Core
2 Solo/Duo"
Currently I'm using:
CFLAGS="-O2 -march=pentium-m -pipe"
CHOST="i686-pc-linux-gnu"
CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}"
MAKEOPTS="-j3"
and
/usr/po
On Friday 10 February 2006 17:23, Jarry wrote:
> Sorry for asking probably trivial question, but if I have in
> /etc/make.conf: CFLAGS="-march=athlon-xp -pipe -O2" ,
>
> does it still make sense to include use-options:
> USE="3dnow mmx sse" ???
yes, because the USE flag is something completly diff
Sorry for asking probably trivial question, but if I have in /etc/make.conf:
CFLAGS="-march=athlon-xp -pipe -O2" ,
does it still make sense to include use-options:
USE="3dnow mmx sse" ???
Or is it selected automaticly by that -march=athlon-xp ?
Jarry
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Hello,
I have just bought Acer Aspire 5020 laptop. Which cfalgs shold I use.
TNX
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
On Sun December 4 2005 6:37 am, Kristian Poul Herkild wrote:
> Robert Crawford wrote:
> > On Sun December 4 2005 4:11 am, Kristian Poul Herkild wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > -mfpmath=sse is not a good idea, the consensus is it actually lowers
> > performance. -msse -mmmx -m3dnow are redundant (implied b
On Sun, 4 Dec 2005 17:49:16 -0500, Robert Crawford wrote:
> Have you deleted the content in /var/tmp/portage (not the directory
> itself)?
It doesn't matter if you delete the directory too, portage will create it
when needed.
However, it is inadvisable to delete the entire directory if it conta
On Sun December 4 2005 6:35 am, Dale wrote:
> Kristian Poul Herkild wrote:
> > Personally I stick to -O2 since -O3 usually won't do much in reality.
> > -O3 takes longer to compile, and there is very little or no gain at
> > all (and sometimes the gain is negative).
> >
> > If space is the most imp
Chris Fairles wrote:
Kristian Poul Herkild wrote:
Robert Crawford wrote:
On Sun December 4 2005 4:11 am, Kristian Poul Herkild wrote:
-mfpmath=sse is not a good idea, the consensus is it actually lowers
performance. -msse -mmmx -m3dnow are redundant (implied by
-march=athlon-xp), and s
Kristian Poul Herkild wrote:
Robert Crawford wrote:
On Sun December 4 2005 4:11 am, Kristian Poul Herkild wrote:
-mfpmath=sse is not a good idea, the consensus is it actually lowers
performance. -msse -mmmx -m3dnow are redundant (implied by
-march=athlon-xp), and should be removed from y
Robert Crawford wrote:
On Sun December 4 2005 4:11 am, Kristian Poul Herkild wrote:
-mfpmath=sse is not a good idea, the consensus is it actually lowers
performance. -msse -mmmx -m3dnow are redundant (implied by
-march=athlon-xp), and should be removed from your cflags line, but SHOULD be
Kristian Poul Herkild wrote:
>
> Personally I stick to -O2 since -O3 usually won't do much in reality.
> -O3 takes longer to compile, and there is very little or no gain at
> all (and sometimes the gain is negative).
>
> If space is the most important issue you might want to compile for
> smallest
Dale wrote:
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
O3 makes binaries much, much bigger. Bigger binaries need more cache&load
time. So bigger binaries are slower a lot of time.
-fomit-frame-pointer is fine, fmpgmath=sse may or may not make your apps
slower or faster. msse, mmmx, m3dnow are (mostly) harm
On Sun December 4 2005 4:11 am, Kristian Poul Herkild wrote:
> Dale wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have been up and running a while and am running stable but this is
> > Gentoo. ;) I found a script that tells you what your CFLAGS are
> > suposed to be and it is different from what I am using. This is
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
>O3 makes binaries much, much bigger. Bigger binaries need more cache&load
>time. So bigger binaries are slower a lot of time.
>-fomit-frame-pointer is fine, fmpgmath=sse may or may not make your apps
>slower or faster. msse, mmmx, m3dnow are (mostly) harmless.
>
>
On Sunday 04 December 2005 09:35, Dale wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have been up and running a while and am running stable but this is
> Gentoo. ;) I found a script that tells you what your CFLAGS are
> suposed to be and it is different from what I am using. This is what I
>
> am using now, from make.conf
Dale wrote:
Hi,
I have been up and running a while and am running stable but this is
Gentoo. ;) I found a script that tells you what your CFLAGS are
suposed to be and it is different from what I am using. This is what I
am using now, from make.conf of course:
CFLAGS="-march=athlon-xp -O3 -
Hi,
I have been up and running a while and am running stable but this is
Gentoo. ;) I found a script that tells you what your CFLAGS are
suposed to be and it is different from what I am using. This is what I
am using now, from make.conf of course:
>CFLAGS="-march=athlon-xp -O3 -pipe -fomit-fra
thanks a lot Marko.
pentium4
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Hi, I was reading about CFLAGS to set it best for my system. I've
searched for the -mcpu value that fits my Intel Celeron 2.00GHz
processor but couldn't find it. By looking cpu family and model from Gentoo Wiki Safe Cflags article "pentium4" value seems the best but i've a celeron?. In make.conf
f
> On 01:31 Sun 23 Oct , Richard Watson wrote:
>> I've just got a new laptop I'm installing Gentoo on and was wondering if
>> anyone could advise on the CFLAG setting I'm using. The CPU is a
>> Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.73GHZ stepping 08. Currently I've set
>> CFLAGS="-02 -mcpu=pentium -
CFLAGS="-O3 -march=pentium-m -pipe"
i prefer this2005/10/23, Willie Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 01:31:32AM +1000, Richard Watson wrote:> I've just got a new laptop I'm installing Gentoo on and was wondering if> anyone could advise on the CFLAG setting I'm using. The CPU is a
On 10/23/05, Bill Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 01:31 Sun 23 Oct , Richard Watson wrote:
> > I've just got a new laptop I'm installing Gentoo on and was wondering if
> > anyone could advise on the CFLAG setting I'm using. The CPU is a
> > Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.73GHZ steppi
Hi Richard,
I've just got a new laptop I'm installing Gentoo on and was wondering if
anyone could advise on the CFLAG setting I'm using. The CPU is a
Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.73GHZ stepping 08. Currently I've set
CFLAGS="-02 -mcpu=pentium -pipe"
You may look at
http://gentoo-wiki.co
On 01:31 Sun 23 Oct , Richard Watson wrote:
> I've just got a new laptop I'm installing Gentoo on and was wondering if
> anyone could advise on the CFLAG setting I'm using. The CPU is a
> Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.73GHZ stepping 08. Currently I've set
> CFLAGS="-02 -mcpu=pentium -pipe"
Richard Watson wrote:
I've just got a new laptop I'm installing Gentoo on and was wondering if
anyone could advise on the CFLAG setting I'm using. The CPU is a
Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.73GHZ stepping 08. Currently I've set
CFLAGS="-02 -mcpu=pentium -pipe"
With a 2.13Ghz pentium-m,
Bill Roberts, who happens to be smarter than you, thinks:
> On 01:31 Sun 23 Oct , Richard Watson wrote:
> > I've just got a new laptop I'm installing Gentoo on and was wondering if
> > anyone could advise on the CFLAG setting I'm using. The CPU is a
> > Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.73GHZ s
On Sun, 2005-10-23 at 01:31 +1000, Richard Watson wrote:
> I've just got a new laptop I'm installing Gentoo on and was wondering if
> anyone could advise on the CFLAG setting I'm using. The CPU is a
> Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.73GHZ stepping 08. Currently I've set
> CFLAGS="-02 -mcpu=pentiu
On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 01:31:32AM +1000, Richard Watson wrote
> I've just got a new laptop I'm installing Gentoo on and was wondering if
> anyone could advise on the CFLAG setting I'm using. The CPU is a
> Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.73GHZ stepping 08. Currently I've set
> CFLAGS="-02 -mcpu=
Hi!
On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 01:31:32 +1000 Richard Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I've just got a new laptop I'm installing Gentoo on and was wondering
> if anyone could advise on the CFLAG setting I'm using. The CPU is a
> Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.73GHZ stepping 08. Currently I've
> set
On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 01:31:32AM +1000, Richard Watson wrote:
> I've just got a new laptop I'm installing Gentoo on and was wondering if
> anyone could advise on the CFLAG setting I'm using. The CPU is a
> Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.73GHZ stepping 08. Currently I've set
> CFLAGS="-02 -mcpu
I've just got a new laptop I'm installing Gentoo on and was wondering if
anyone could advise on the CFLAG setting I'm using. The CPU is a
Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.73GHZ stepping 08. Currently I've set
CFLAGS="-02 -mcpu=pentium -pipe"
--
Thanks, Richard
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing l
Andreas Fredriksson wrote:
On 5/29/05, Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On the subject of CPU flags, anyone tried optimizing gentoo for a
Toshiba Libretto (110CT)?
model name : Mobile Pentium MMX
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8 mmx
This is in
Andreas Fredriksson wrote:
On 5/29/05, Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On the subject of CPU flags, anyone tried optimizing gentoo for a
Toshiba Libretto (110CT)?
model name : Mobile Pentium MMX
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8 mmx
This is in
Hello Andreas,
Thanks for the tip. I must admit that the details of the heirarchy of
Intel processors since they abondoned the purely numeric naming
conventions is something I don't have a complete handle on.
Regards,
DigbyT
On Sun, May 29, 2005 at 10:32:37PM +0200, Andreas Fredriksson wrote:
>
On 5/29/05, Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On the subject of CPU flags, anyone tried optimizing gentoo for a
> Toshiba Libretto (110CT)?
> model name : Mobile Pentium MMX
> flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8 mmx
This is indeed a "classic" pentium chip
On 5/29/05, Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> how do I determine which of the stage3 installation files:
> stage3-athlon-xp-2005.0.tar.bz2
> stage3-i686-2005.0.tar.bz2
> stage3-pentium3-2005.0.tar.bz2
> stage3-pentium4-2005.0.tar.bz2
> stage3-x86-2005
On the subject of CPU flags, anyone tried optimizing gentoo for a
Toshiba Libretto (110CT)?
how do I determine which of the stage3 installation files:
stage3-athlon-xp-2005.0.tar.bz2
stage3-i686-2005.0.tar.bz2
stage3-pentium3-2005.0.tar.bz2
stage3-pentium4-2005.0.ta
On 5/28/05, Ryan Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Optimization level 9 (-O9)? Thats a laugh. Read the GCC man page, the
> optimization levels are just groupings of other optimization flags (-O1, -O2,
> -O3, -O0, -Os), with optimization level 3 (-O3) containing the most
> optimization flags.
Ok already, we hear you. No need to post the same message 5 times.
And BTW, it is a "feature" of GMail that you don't see your own posts.
Cheers,
-Richard
Ryan Lynch wrote:
>Optimization level 9 (-O9)? Thats a laugh. Read the GCC man page, the
>optimization levels are just groupings of oth
Optimization level 9 (-O9)? Thats a laugh. Read the GCC man page, the
optimization levels are just groupings of other optimization flags (-O1, -O2,
-O3, -O0, -Os), with optimization level 3 (-O3) containing the most
optimization flags. The numbers don't correlate to any kind of optimization
Optimization level 9 (-O9)? Thats a laugh. Read the GCC man page, the
optimization levels are just groupings of other optimization flags (-O1, -O2,
-O3, -O0, -Os), with optimization level 3 (-O3) containing the most
optimization flags. The numbers don't correlate to any kind of optimization
Optimization level 9 (-O9)? Thats a laugh. Read the GCC man page, the
optimization levels are just groupings of other optimization flags (-O1, -O2,
-O3, -O0, -Os), with optimization level 3 (-O3) containing the most
optimization flags. The numbers don't correlate to any kind of optimization
Optimization level 9 (-O9)? Thats a laugh. Read the GCC man page, the
optimization levels are just groupings of other optimization flags (-O1, -O2,
-O3, -O0, -Os), with optimization level 3 (-O3) containing the most
optimization flags. The numbers don't correlate to any kind of optimization
On Monday 23 May 2005 05:09 pm, Colin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -O3: The highest performance optimization level before code starts to
> break. It goes up to -O9 if you're daring. (Use -Os to compile for
> size.) Implies a lot of stuff.
Ack! What? It does *not* go up to -O9 and never has.
The PowerPC make.conf.example suggests these CFLAGS:
"-O2 -mcpu=604 -mtune=604 -mstring -mmultiple -mpowerpc-gfxopt -pipe"
Meanwhile, various other sites recommend only these:
"-O3 -march=604 -fsigned_char -pipe"
Which CFLAGS are best for the 604 processor? I'm guessing that I should
just comb
* On Tue May-24-2005 at 01:08:51 AM +0200, Julien Cayzac said:
> On 5/24/05, Richard Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [ recommandations about performance cflags ]
>
> While we're at optimizing stuff, here are my CFLAGS (athlon-xp mobile,
> barton core):
>
> CFLAGS="-O2 -march=athlon-xp -msse -
On 5/24/05, Richard Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [ recommandations about performance cflags ]
While we're at optimizing stuff, here are my CFLAGS (athlon-xp mobile,
barton core):
CFLAGS="-O2 -march=athlon-xp -msse -mfpmath=sse -pipe
-finline-functions -fsched2-use-superblocks -fsched2-use-tr
Colin wrote:
> -funroll-loops: If you can tell how many times a loop will loop
> (mainly for loops), then unroll it. Does it increase performance? If
> it does, it's unnoticeable. Don't tell anyone you use it though. It
> spreads the whole "Gentoo ricer" myth that's been going around the
> I
Walter Dnes wrote:
Currently, I use "-march=i686" for my 3 machines, a P4, a PIII, and a
PII (and a partridge in a pear tr).
According to the gcc docs at...
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.3.5/gcc/i386-and-x86_002d64-Options.html#i386-and-x86_002d64-Options
"i586 is equivalent to
Currently, I use "-march=i686" for my 3 machines, a P4, a PIII, and a
PII (and a partridge in a pear tr).
According to the gcc docs at...
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.3.5/gcc/i386-and-x86_002d64-Options.html#i386-and-x86_002d64-Options
"i586 is equivalent to pentium and i686 is
101 - 173 of 173 matches
Mail list logo
