| 1 |
On 06 Mar 2003 12:19:22 +0000 |
| 2 |
Dhruba Bandopadhyay <dhruba@××××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Hello |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Today I saw in a gentoo cvs server email the following. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> 2003-03-05 Wednesday 11:01 method |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> * sys-devel/gcc/: ChangeLog, gcc-3.2.2-r4.ebuild, |
| 11 |
> files/digest-gcc-3.2.2-r4: replace-flags "-march=pentium4" |
| 12 |
> "-march=pentium3" to fix bug #16867 |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Now, I realise that the pentium4 is prone to errors but I hope this |
| 15 |
> does not begin a spree of changes where -march=pentium4 flags will |
| 16 |
> automatically downgraded to -march=pentium3 by the ebuild or |
| 17 |
> otherwise. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> I have used pentium4 for some time now with no problems whatsoever and |
| 20 |
> would like the raise the issue of whether downgrading of flags should |
| 21 |
> be manual and left to the user rather than being automatically |
| 22 |
> modified. A choice would be nice too. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Also, what exactly is responsible for pentium4 bugs? Is it gcc and is |
| 25 |
> there hope of this being resolved with future versions? And will |
| 26 |
> using pentium3 result in a noticeable decline in performance? |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
I use -march=pentium3, and my box is speedy (although haven't tried |
| 30 |
with pentium4 for some time). But then .. rather a bit slower than |
| 31 |
unstable? |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
I am with you on this. I did only do the pentium4->pentium3 for some |
| 34 |
critical ebuilds like xfree and mozilla, as else we might miss if |
| 35 |
gcc actually gets it fixed. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Lastly I do still consider fixing glibc, as it really (math tests, etc) |
| 38 |
break on -march=pentium4 :( |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Martin Schlemmer |
| 44 |
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer |
| 45 |
Cape Town, South Africa |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
-- |
| 49 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives