[Steffen Möller]
> @Petter, Holger: For packages featuring LTO, would you consider it
> reasonable to run those twice in the CI, i.e. with and without the LTO
> optimisation?
I doubt ci.debian.net is the right tool for this, as it is supposed to
run tests on the installed packages, not during
On 31/03/16 02:34, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 01:36:58PM +0200, Steffen Möller a écrit :
>> I had started this friendly and constructive thread on Debian Devel on
>> link time optimisation
>>
>> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2016/03/msg00399.html
>>
>> and my
Hi all,
On 30.03.2016 22:28, Sascha Steinbiss wrote:
>> The promotion of this enhancement I consider to be exceptionally
>> important, especially so if we can tie this up with the continuous
>> integration testing and some benchmarking. For all the folks that wait
>> over some NGS data set to be
Le Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 01:36:58PM +0200, Steffen Möller a écrit :
>
> I had started this friendly and constructive thread on Debian Devel on
> link time optimisation
>
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2016/03/msg00399.html
>
> and my personal consensus is that we should possibly start
Hi Steffen,
[…]
> * minimal impact on regular packaging - maintainers should not need to
> worry unless they do want to learn about it. To be achieved by changes
> to debhelper and the sharing of our packaging in our source code
> repositories.
>
> * LTO flags should be optionally excluded from
Hello,
I had started this friendly and constructive thread on Debian Devel on
link time optimisation
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2016/03/msg00399.html
and my personal consensus is that we should possibly start with the most
rewarding scientific packages of ours to see how it goes.
6 matches
Mail list logo
