Gentoo Archives: gentoo-commits

From: "Joshua Saddler (nightmorph)" <nightmorph@g.o>
To: gentoo-commits@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-commits] gentoo commit in xml/htdocs/doc/en: gcc-optimization.xml
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 00:24:34
nightmorph    10/07/27 00:24:29

  Modified:             gcc-optimization.xml
  Update gcc docs, fix some basic GuideXML

Revision  Changes    Path
1.18                 xml/htdocs/doc/en/gcc-optimization.xml

file :
diff :

Index: gcc-optimization.xml
RCS file: /var/cvsroot/gentoo/xml/htdocs/doc/en/gcc-optimization.xml,v
retrieving revision 1.17
retrieving revision 1.18
diff -u -r1.17 -r1.18
--- gcc-optimization.xml	19 Oct 2009 16:16:36 -0000	1.17
+++ gcc-optimization.xml	27 Jul 2010 00:24:29 -0000	1.18
@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
 <?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
 <!DOCTYPE guide SYSTEM "/dtd/guide.dtd">
-<!-- $Header: /var/cvsroot/gentoo/xml/htdocs/doc/en/gcc-optimization.xml,v 1.17 2009/10/19 16:16:36 neysx Exp $ -->
+<!-- $Header: /var/cvsroot/gentoo/xml/htdocs/doc/en/gcc-optimization.xml,v 1.18 2010/07/27 00:24:29 nightmorph Exp $ -->
-<guide link="/doc/en/gcc-optimization.xml">
 <title>Compilation Optimization Guide</title>
 <author title="Author">
-  <mail link="nightmorph@g.o">Joshua Saddler</mail>
+  <mail link="nightmorph"/>
@@ -19,8 +19,8 @@
 <!-- See -->
@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@
 They can be used to decrease the amount of debug messages for a program,
 increase error warning levels, and, of course, to optimize the code produced.
 The <uri
 gcc handbook</uri> maintains a complete list of available options and their
@@ -239,7 +239,7 @@
 x86/x86-64) . . . but with a different flag name. Again, <c>gcc</c>'s behavior
 and flag naming just isn't consistent across architectures, so be sure to check
 the <c>gcc</c> <uri
 to determine which one you should use for your system.
@@ -248,7 +248,7 @@
 read chapter 5 of the appropriate <uri link="/doc/en/handbook/">Gentoo
 Installation Handbook</uri> for your arch. Also, read the <c>gcc</c> manual's
 list of <uri
 options</uri>, as well as more detailed explanations about the differences
 between <c>-march</c>, <c>-mcpu</c>, and <c>-mtune</c>.
@@ -274,7 +274,7 @@
 With the exception of <c>-O0</c>, the <c>-O</c> settings each activate several
 additional flags, so be sure to read the gcc manual's chapter on <uri
 options</uri> to learn which flags are activated at each <c>-O</c> level, as
 well as some explanations as to what they do.
@@ -420,7 +420,7 @@
 You should check the <uri
 of x86 and x86-64-specific flags to see which of these instruction sets are
 activated by the proper CPU type flag. If an instruction is listed, then you
 don't need to specify it; it will be turned on by using the proper <c>-march</c>
@@ -441,7 +441,7 @@
 No, you only <e>think</e> you do because someone has convinced you that more
 flags are better. Aggressive flags will only hurt your applications when used
 system-wide. Even the <c>gcc</c> <uri
 says that using <c>-funroll-loops</c> and <c>-funroll-all-loops</c> makes code
 larger and run more slowly. Yet for some reason, these two flags, along with
 <c>-ffast-math</c>, <c>-fforce-mem</c>, <c>-fforce-addr</c>, and similar flags,
@@ -582,11 +582,11 @@
 abusive</uri> ways of trying force Portage to do so.
 You <e>should not</e> try to force Portage to use per-package flags, as it is
 not in any way supported and will greatly complicate bug reports. Just set your
 flags in <path>/etc/make.conf</path> to be used on a system-wide basis.
@@ -603,7 +603,7 @@
-    The <uri link="">GNU gcc
+    The <uri link="">GNU gcc