| 1 |
On Thursday 06 July 2006 14:49, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> Well, you're assuming that |
| 3 |
Properly listing, what an arcane science. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> a) everyone's using a C compiler, |
| 6 |
No, I assume that everyone is using a compiler. You cannot have a C++ compiler |
| 7 |
without a C compiler. The first person I see that sets CXXFLAGS but not |
| 8 |
CFLAGS I'm personally going to give him the "doesn't have a clue" prize. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> b) that gcc has the slightest clue what it's doing, |
| 11 |
No, I assume that gcc has a big clue about which capabilities are available to |
| 12 |
the -march switch. I might be assuming that users have a clue on what they |
| 13 |
are doing, but that's an assumption I do have to do, or I shouldn't be |
| 14 |
working on Gentoo but on Debian, which seems pretty good at optimising for |
| 15 |
i386 still. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> c) that the user has no problem using nasty hacks to regain control, |
| 18 |
Where "regain control" is "doing something that could have done before but |
| 19 |
made actually no sense to do before. And the bashrc thing is not a big nasty |
| 20 |
hack, works quite well for me. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> d) that this information is only needed at compile time, |
| 23 |
Well of course use flags are available at runtime for the packages built to |
| 24 |
know, this is perfectly logic of you. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
You really was getting out of arguments, don't you? |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
If I have to enable a configure switch I need it only at buildtime. If it has |
| 29 |
to be known at runtime there's the cpuid function! |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
> e) that various gcc internal definitions won't change... |
| 32 |
It's like assuming that gcc will always output the correct hello world for |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
int main() { |
| 35 |
printf("Hello, world!\n"); |
| 36 |
return 0; |
| 37 |
} |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
If it does change those values, it's going to be a killer for way more than |
| 40 |
just Portage. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
> You're adding a lot of complexity, and thus |
| 43 |
> room for very weird breakages, to something that doesn't need it. |
| 44 |
You're not exposing any of such breakages, I find it to reduce complexity to |
| 45 |
users that cannot try to enable SSE3 on an Athlon-TBird system. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
-- |
| 48 |
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://farragut.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org/ |
| 49 |
Gentoo/Alt lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE |
Archives