On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Michael Powell <nightre...@hotmail.com> wrote: > I think this matters more to third party ports software builds than it does > the system. I thought that large pieces of the kernel were designed to not > make much, if any, use the various SIMD extensions. Maybe this has changed > and I'm behind the times.
I wouldn't bother setting CPUTYPE at all. It's more trouble than it's worth. And you're right: for most ports and for the whole system, it doesn't really matter. If you have a very specific port that needs particular tuning, it has either already been tuned individually by the port maintainer, or you could apply more optimizations yourself (which would likely require a specially compiled tool chain, when -O<something> with the base gcc/binutils isn't enough). Unless you have a very specific need, better leave CPUTYPE alone. > Your use of athlon64 seems reasonable to me. It is what I've been using. If > it can be done better I'm always on the look out for better. > > -Mike -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"