| 1 |
quoth the Richard Fish: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> BTW, Darren's answer on this thread seems incorrect to me. Changing |
| 4 |
> CHOST is a pretty significant thing to tweak, certainly as significant |
| 5 |
> as changing gcc versions, and you really should re-merge *everything* |
| 6 |
> to make sure your something doesn't wind up broken. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Hi Richard, sorry I just noticed this (due to your help in a more recent |
| 9 |
thread where you linked to this). Anyway, my reasoning for my answer was that |
| 10 |
(although he didn't explicitly state it) Tim wanted to upgrade from i386 to |
| 11 |
i686 presumably. A binary built for a 386 is still able to run on a 686 |
| 12 |
system. The cpu instructions are forward (but not backward) compatible. Thus, |
| 13 |
I did not think it necessary for a wholesale rebuild of the entire system on |
| 14 |
the spot. Indeed it seems this is not as simple as I thought. I may have been |
| 15 |
thinking changing CHOST was as simple as changing -march or -mcpu... |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
I still stand by my assertion that the speed increase will be trivial ;) |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
-d |
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
darren kirby :: Part of the problem since 1976 :: http://badcomputer.org |
| 22 |
"...the number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected..." |
| 23 |
- Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, June 1972 |
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives