| 1 |
On Thursday 06 July 2006 19:51, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> And for a single compile? |
| 3 |
I always leave the two of them in sync, even C++ apps might have parts |
| 4 |
building CFLAGS. In case you know you're going to use only C++ is not |
| 5 |
difficult to use |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
CFLAGS=${CXXFLAGS} has_cpuset 3dnow |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
don't you think? |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> And your assumption would be wrong. I can assure you that relying upon |
| 12 |
> -march doing anything sensible with __MAGIC__ is entirely unsafe. Go |
| 13 |
> and look at the VIS handling if you want a perfect example. |
| 14 |
Okay, maybe VIS handling is broken. But we can rely pretty safely on x86, |
| 15 |
amd64 and PPC gcc to know the table of arches and extensions supported. |
| 16 |
Remember that I asked to talk with SPARC team for VIS just because I only |
| 17 |
know about the other three arches. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> No no. Where "regain control" means the user has to screw around with |
| 20 |
> nasty hacks and pray, rather than setting a well defined, specific |
| 21 |
> variable. |
| 22 |
Find me a reason to do that, a part for broken MMX code that should be |
| 23 |
disabled on the ebuild itself already. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> Uh. USE flags are available at DEPEND time. |
| 26 |
If you talk about the nasm dependency, then it is rare, most of the MMX |
| 27 |
support is inline in C sources anyway. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> And at the metadata phase? |
| 30 |
Should be already transparent or something is strange. nasm is simpler to add |
| 31 |
the dependency for x86, there is really few people not enabling mmx already. |
| 32 |
Yes it is a bit of regression, but for a small percentage of users, while |
| 33 |
there's more safety for many other people. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
> Er. No. Not at all. The __MAGIC__ isn't guaranteed. Quite the contrary. |
| 36 |
This ain't no magic. The magic is in the _CODE_ that GCC creates, but not in |
| 37 |
the _DEFINES_ that GCC emits. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
> You're trying to guess what the user wants based upon hairy magic, |
| 40 |
No, about their chosen architecture. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
> rather than doing what the user says (aren't you always yelling at |
| 43 |
> upstreams for doing that?) |
| 44 |
The user asks for athlon64 support? They get athlon64 (mmx, 3dnow, 3dnowex, |
| 45 |
sse, sse2) |
| 46 |
The user asks for G3 support? They get G3 (nothing) |
| 47 |
The user asks for Pentium4 support? They get what they want (mmx, sse, sse2, |
| 48 |
sse3 in case) |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
-- |
| 51 |
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://farragut.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org/ |
| 52 |
Gentoo/Alt lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE |
Archives