Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Danie Iliev <danny@××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Portage parenthesis
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2006 17:24:39
Message-Id: 20061002171938.46F3B1A006D93@mail.ilievnet.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Portage parenthesis by "Bo Ørsted Andresen"
1 On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 08:45:24 +0200
2 Bo Ørsted Andresen <bo.andresen@××××.dk> wrote:
3
4 > On Monday 02 October 2006 08:21, Danie Iliev wrote:
5 > > Several days ago the guys at gentoo-am64 mailing list explained to me
6 > > all these flags enable different CFLAGS optimizations which came as the
7 > [SNIP]
8 >
9 > Please don't confuse CFLAGS with USE flags. CFLAGS are passed on to the
10 > compiler and tell it what kind of code to generate. E.g. an mmx USE flag
11 > usually tells the package through a configure switch (such as --enable-mmx)
12 > to autotools to enable some assembly code that uses the mmx instructions
13 > instead of some fallback code which doesn't. That assembly code is written
14 > manually rather than generated by the compiler (otherwise the CFLAG would
15 > suffice).
16 >
17 > > There is also another article which explains why these are hard-masked:
18 > >
19 > > http://dev.gentoo.org/~plasmaroo/devmanual/archs/amd64/
20 >
21 > Thanks, I forgot that one. The url is obsolete though:
22 >
23 > http://devmanual.gentoo.org/archs/amd64/index.html
24 >
25
26 Wouldn't CFLAGS and the mentioned USE flags lead to the same thing
27 (even through different mechanisms) in this particular case?
28
29
30 --
31 Best regards,
32 Daniel
33
34
35 --
36 gentoo-user@g.o mailing list