1 |
Patrick Börjesson schreef: |
2 |
> On 05/07/23 18:37, Richard Fish wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>>>>And it seems to me that if there is a bug, it might be a *documentation* |
5 |
>>>>bug (because the other person who mentioned using march=k8 said that |
6 |
>>>>that was the recommendation of the docs, but that seems to no longer be |
7 |
>>>>the case, if people using this flag are regularly receiving compilation |
8 |
>>>>errors). |
9 |
>>>> |
10 |
>>> |
11 |
>>>Documentation bug? Not recommended by the docs any more? |
12 |
>>>You might want to actually try to find information about the subjects |
13 |
>>>you respond to. |
14 |
>>> |
15 |
>>>Straight out of the AMD64 Gentoo Handbook: |
16 |
>>>"AMD64 users who want to use a native 64 bit system should use |
17 |
>>>-march=k8" |
18 |
>>>Combining that cite with the information from the gcc info page, I'm |
19 |
>>>pretty sure it's not a "documentation bug". |
20 |
>>> |
21 |
>>> |
22 |
>>> |
23 |
>> |
24 |
>>Hold on...the -march thing would be an easy mistake to make for those of |
25 |
>>us who don't run AMD processors, and are just trying to help. Afterall, |
26 |
>>the platform keyword is "amd64". And gcc info says that k8, opteron, |
27 |
>>athlon64, and athlon-fx are all equivalent, although I would suggest |
28 |
>>that the non-k8 options are more descriptive. |
29 |
> |
30 |
> |
31 |
> Of course, but in this case it wasn't an oversight... The poster |
32 |
> explicitly said that using march=k8 seemed to no longer be the |
33 |
> recommendation of the docs. That implies at least _some_ looking into |
34 |
> the subject before posting... |
35 |
> |
36 |
|
37 |
If the poster being referred to is me, that wasn't what I meant to say, |
38 |
or rather what I meant to be *understood*-- what I meant was that |
39 |
apparently the Handbook recommends using the k8 flag, but people using |
40 |
that flag seem (and I stress "seem", as I don't follow this issue that |
41 |
closely, naturally) to be running into problems, whereas those using the |
42 |
amd64 flag are not (or at least not the same problems). |
43 |
|
44 |
Now, I don't know the truth of the matter, but that would lead me to |
45 |
suspect that there could be *outdated information in the Gentoo |
46 |
documentation* (thus, a "documentation bug"), which, if those affected |
47 |
can verify, should perhaps be submitted. |
48 |
|
49 |
Sorry for the confusion. |
50 |
|
51 |
Holly |
52 |
-- |
53 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |