Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?)
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 22:07:49
Message-Id: 20080530220743.GH17201@comet
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?) by Ciaran McCreesh
On 22:53 Fri 30 May     , Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 31 May 2008 00:47:44 +0300 > Mart Raudsepp <leio@g.o> wrote: > > The story that matters here is, that a C++ corner case that does not > > work on 0.01% of packages with --as-needed and breaks on non-ELF > > platforms, should not cause good things for our users to be shot down. > > You could say the same thing for -ffast-math...
When there's a feature that only breaks one package that we know of, wouldn't it make more sense to enable it globally and add an exception than to do it the other way around? I see that a number of packages in the tree explicitly filter -ffast-math. Thanks, Donnie -- gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?) Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>