https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70133
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #6) > > 3) We should think about whether we need to put out these +no extension > > strings at all. I don't like that for my older systems I'll need to keep > > updating my binutils to cover any new extension strings (e.g. +nolse) that > > are added by GCC if I want to use -march=native . We shouldn't force that if > > we don't have to. > > > > Do you know why these +no where introduced in the first place? > > Why would there be a difference between "+nolse" and "" for instance? X86, adds the -mno-* option too with respect of -march=native.
