| 1 |
Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wednesday 23 August 2006 22:22, Michael Hennebry wrote: |
| 3 |
>>> Oh, and BTW, on gentoo your optimization choices for gcc are -O, -O2 |
| 4 |
>>> or nothing, because all other -O options are replaced with -O2 by |
| 5 |
>>> toolchain.eclass. |
| 6 |
>> Since the OP wanted -Os, the question remains: |
| 7 |
>> How, if at all, can he get -Os ? |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Assuming that the OP doesn't want a broken gcc he will probably be happy |
| 10 |
> with -Os for the packages that doesn't break with it... ;) |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Being the OP in this case, I want to state that I didn't want "-Os for |
| 13 |
all pkgs". I just decided to set "-Os" inside my CFLAGS, and I am |
| 14 |
perfectly happy with any working gcc resulting from this. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
This isn't only about control, this is also about trust: |
| 17 |
I may control which settings to use for any pkg, but then I also have to |
| 18 |
trust the decisions of the maintainers which choices they made for |
| 19 |
individual pkgs (apart from overriding their settings, which somehow |
| 20 |
questions the usage of portage IMO). |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
In fact, from my point of view, I am *allowed* to trust in this. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Stefan |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives