1 |
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Pandu Poluan <pandu@××××××.info> wrote: |
2 |
> On Nov 28, 2011 10:38 PM, "Michael Mol" <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote: |
3 |
>> On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 7:54 PM, Pandu Poluan <pandu@××××××.info> wrote: |
4 |
>> > Won't file a bug report, though. I have a feeling that my bug report re: |
5 |
>> > emerge failure will be marked WONTFIX thanks to the 'ricer special' |
6 |
>> > CFLAGS |
7 |
>> |
8 |
>> The CFLAGS you showed me weren't any more ricer than "-O2 |
9 |
>> -march=native". (I didn't know that -D_FORTIFY=2 came from gcc) |
10 |
>> |
11 |
>> They wouldn't have a leg to stand on... |
12 |
>> |
13 |
> |
14 |
> Mine is: |
15 |
> |
16 |
> CFLAGS="-O2 -march=native -fomit-frame-pointer -floop-interchange |
17 |
> -floop-strip-mine -floop-block -funsafe-math-optimizations |
18 |
> -fexcess-precision=fast" |
19 |
> |
20 |
> If you tell me that's not a ricer's CFLAGS, then you've just made me a very |
21 |
> happy cat :-) |
22 |
|
23 |
No, you've got some ugly flags in there. -fexcess-precision and |
24 |
-funsafe-math-optimizations, in particular. (I must have been talking |
25 |
to someone else last week; sorry, I'm terrible with names.) |
26 |
|
27 |
-fomit-frame-pointer shouldn't cause any headaches unless you're |
28 |
feeding a gdb stack trace, and you're not adding any debugging data, |
29 |
so your stack traces would be pretty useless, anyway. |
30 |
|
31 |
I don't know about -floop-interchange, -floop-strip-mine or |
32 |
-floop-block. I recognize at least one of them from the discussion of |
33 |
graphite the other day. |
34 |
|
35 |
However, if you get a *build-time* error that isn't, e.g. a tool |
36 |
crashing, then there's not *much* reason to doubt the bug report, |
37 |
IMHO. |
38 |
|
39 |
-- |
40 |
:wq |