Re: [gentoo-amd64] gcc 4.1 + CFLAGS

[Samir Mishra]

Fernando Boaglio wrote:
> Hi there!
>
> I was told with gcc 4.1 you can't play with some CFLAGS because you
> will really break your system (more dangerous than gcc 3.x !  ).
>
> Have you tried "emerge -e system" with GCC +  some uncommon flag?
>
> Can you share your CFLAGS with us  ?
>
> TIA!
> []'s
> boaglio@×××××.com

These are the flag settings I have. My WS has >2GB RAM so I'm using 
-mcmodel=medium. But as you can see, they are hardly "safe".

Of the list below, the LDFLAGS -Wl,-Bdirect -Wl,-hashvals is supposed to 
make the biggest difference. I have no means of comparison.

A few applications fail to compile, but so far from the >500 packages I 
currently have on my system, only the following have failed to compile 
-- glibc-2.4, gcc, sandbox, strace, transcode, libmpeg3. A few other 
applications, mainly noticed with audio applications, are behaving 
"strange". But I haven't had the opportunity to track all these problems 
down.

# For GCC 4+
CFLAGS="-march=k8 -O2 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer -fforce-addr -ftracer 
-frename-registers -mno-tls-direct-seg-refs -mcmodel=medium"
CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS} -fvisibility-inlines-hidden"
LDFLAGS="-Wl,-O1 -Wl,--sort-common -Wl,--enable-new-dtags -Wl,-Bdirect 
-Wl,-hashvals -Wl,-zdynsort -s"

# For GCC -- 3.4.5
#CFLAGS="-march=k8 -O2 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer -fforce-addr -ftracer 
-frename-registers"
#CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS} -fvisibility-inlines-hidden"
#LDFLAGS="-Wl,-O1 -Wl,--sort-common -Wl,--enable-new-dtags -Wl,-zdynsort -s"

# For minimal variable definitions
#CFLAGS="-march=k8 -O2 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer"
#CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}"
#LDFLAGS="-Wl,-O1"


Samir
-- 
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list