| 1 |
It probably is, I can't say I'd know. But, nonetheless - it'd be great if this feature would be added to Gentoo - that is, getting the settings in CHOST outside of portage or whatever. Or am I the only one with the need of using it outside portage? ;-) |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On Sun, 7 Apr 2002 00:05:26 +0200 |
| 4 |
Spider <spider@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> Isn't the optimization done with the CFLAGS and CHOST is only for |
| 7 |
> choosing what headers, format of INT and pointers to use? |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> //Spider |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> begin quote |
| 12 |
> On Sat, 6 Apr 2002 16:52:39 +0200 |
| 13 |
> Malte Obbel Forsberg <door@×××××××××××.nu> wrote: |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> > For when I'm compiling the Zangband ebuild (that I've made myself), |
| 16 |
> > since there is no ./configure-script to give the ${CHOST} to, I can't |
| 17 |
> > optimize it for the computer.. Which is, however, not very necessary |
| 18 |
> > in this case - but think of other applications that do not have a |
| 19 |
> > configure script, but a simple makefile. What to do with those, in the |
| 20 |
> > aspect of optimizing? At least I feel it's a problem (although, a |
| 21 |
> > small such), but it wouldn't be very hard to do something about, would |
| 22 |
> > it? |
| 23 |
> -- |
| 24 |
> begin happy99.exe |
| 25 |
> This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature! |
| 26 |
> See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information. |
| 27 |
> end |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Malte Obbel Forsberg |
| 33 |
door@×××××××××××.nu |
| 34 |
JabberId: doordoc@××××××.at |
| 35 |
UIN: 12035285 |
Archives