nightmorph 07/07/01 21:02:14 Modified: gcc-optimization.xml Log: slightly revised the bit on ldflags support according to a comment hanno and some others made on irc, and the new filename still sucks by the way
Revision Changes Path 1.5 xml/htdocs/doc/en/gcc-optimization.xml file : http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/doc/en/gcc-optimization.xml?rev=1.5&view=markup plain: http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/doc/en/gcc-optimization.xml?rev=1.5&content-type=text/plain diff : http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/doc/en/gcc-optimization.xml?r1=1.4&r2=1.5 Index: gcc-optimization.xml =================================================================== RCS file: /var/cvsroot/gentoo/xml/htdocs/doc/en/gcc-optimization.xml,v retrieving revision 1.4 retrieving revision 1.5 diff -u -r1.4 -r1.5 --- gcc-optimization.xml 28 Jun 2007 05:14:50 -0000 1.4 +++ gcc-optimization.xml 1 Jul 2007 21:02:14 -0000 1.5 @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ <?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?> -<!-- $Header: /var/cvsroot/gentoo/xml/htdocs/doc/en/gcc-optimization.xml,v 1.4 2007/06/28 05:14:50 nightmorph Exp $ --> +<!-- $Header: /var/cvsroot/gentoo/xml/htdocs/doc/en/gcc-optimization.xml,v 1.5 2007/07/01 21:02:14 nightmorph Exp $ --> <!DOCTYPE guide SYSTEM "/dtd/guide.dtd"> @@ -22,8 +22,8 @@ <!-- See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5 --> <license/> -<version>1.1</version> -<date>2007-06-27</date> +<version>1.2</version> +<date>2007-07-01</date> <chapter> <title>Introduction</title> @@ -539,10 +539,10 @@ <p> Don't use them. You may have heard that they can speed up application load times or reduce binary size, but in reality, LDFLAGS are more likely to make your -applications stop working. They are not supported, and you can expect to have -your bugs closed and marked INVALID if you report errors with packages while -using LDFLAGS. At the very least you will have to recompile all affected -packages without setting LDFLAGS. +applications stop working. They are not supported, and you may have your bugs +closed and marked INVALID if you report errors with packages while using +LDFLAGS. At the very least you will have to recompile all affected packages +without setting LDFLAGS. </p> </body> -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
