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 The url is obsolete though: |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 |