On Fri, 2006-07-07 at 04:28 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: > On Friday 07 July 2006 03:15, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > x86_64 toolchain accepting 3dnow on a nocona arch? :) > > that isnt a cross-compile nor a different architecture > This is the whole point of my solution. >
From what you discussed above, it sounds more like a problem due to short-sightedness on the amd64 team's part (no offence to amd64 team, just stating things as I see them) because they just enabled 3dnow for stuff that worked regardless. Stupid question though ... does the gcc test thingy list __3dNOW__ on nocona ? I would think that it does, as there is no -march=nocona (or whatever) yet. So now you want to instead of fixing the amd64 profiles to be more flexible, implement something that will give the green light to users on x86 to use flag combinations, especially on older gcc's that causes great pain for themselfs and developers ? Sure, nocona should have had CFLAGS="-march=k8 -mno-3dnow", but it would never have been an issue if the '3dnow' USE flag worked as expected on amd64 ;) Anyhow, just ranting - I understand the reasoning for doing it that way, but you should also see it from the x86 side where -msse could really mean a broken system, and maybe rethink your solution. -- Martin Schlemmer
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
