On 11/15/2017 10:50 AM, Jorge Almeida wrote: > > Are you really sure? I was under the impression that ebuilds did it, > and I find that natural. I didn't view that as a bug at all.
On principle, most things in the tree should respect whatever CFLAGS, LDFLAGS, etc. you ask for. The problems resulting from that are predictable: if you add "-ffast-math" to your CFLAGS and then start getting crashes; well, you asked for it. We're not going to fix that for you in every ebuild. On the other hand, there are packages where some optimizations fail due to a compiler bug or something else that is not by design. Some packages optimize their critical path in assembly, and the resulting code doesn't play well with otherwise-reasonable CFLAGS. In cases like those, it's often simpler to disable the problematic flag in the ebuild rather than have a thousand people do the same thing locally.
