Re: [gentoo-user] CFLAGS query

2005-01-27 Thread Billy Holmes
Ryan Sims wrote: Another question, somewhat related: I saw a post re using "LDFLAGS="-Wl,-O1" in the make.conf file. However, the gentoo devs seem to go a little mad whenever they run into this idea, so I quit that practice. I'm a little unclear on a) what exactly that does and b) why it's harmf

Re: [gentoo-user] CFLAGS query

2005-01-27 Thread Ryan Sims
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 11:34:58 +0800, William Kenworthy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Step 1, take everything in the forums and what others say including me > with a large dose of scepticism: if you want the truth, test it > yourself, and look up the man pages for each option and see what it > really

Re: [gentoo-user] CFLAGS query

2005-01-26 Thread Volker Armin Hemmann
On Thursday 27 January 2005 04:36, Nicolas Bailey wrote: > Sorry to barge in, but this got me thinking-- > > My make.conf has a warning about march=pentium4 generating bad sse2 > instructions or somesuch. I've seen an example using python to > demonstrate this. For this reason, quite some time ag

Re: [gentoo-user] CFLAGS query

2005-01-26 Thread Nicolas Bailey
Sorry to barge in, but this got me thinking-- My make.conf has a warning about march=pentium4 generating bad sse2 instructions or somesuch. I've seen an example using python to demonstrate this. For this reason, quite some time ago, I set my march to pentium3 and have left it. Is it safe at thi

Re: [gentoo-user] CFLAGS query

2005-01-26 Thread Volker Armin Hemmann
Hi, On Wednesday 26 January 2005 05:51, Nick Smith wrote: > > then on the forums, people are saying that sse=387 is bad to use, and > some say ffast-math is bad as well. i mean how can someone decide what > to use when everyone has their own opinions. First, read man gcc. They say a lot of thi

Re: [gentoo-user] CFLAGS query

2005-01-26 Thread Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
On Tuesday 25 January 2005 09:34 pm, William Kenworthy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Step 1, take everything in the forums and what others say including me > with a large dose of scepticism. This is true. Some people are using CFLAGS that are just crazy (to me), but swear by them. Others will h

Re: [gentoo-user] CFLAGS query

2005-01-26 Thread Alastair Murray
Nick Smith wrote: then on the forums, people are saying that sse=387 is bad to use As far as I'm aware the register allocator in gcc isn't smart enough to handle -mfpmath=sse,387 effectively yet (even in the forth-coming gcc 4.0). It causes sse variables to be stored in 387 registers and vice-v

Re: [gentoo-user] CFLAGS query

2005-01-25 Thread William Kenworthy
Step 1, take everything in the forums and what others say including me with a large dose of scepticism: if you want the truth, test it yourself, and look up the man pages for each option and see what it really does - not what the forums say as people do not always quote the source correctly. For i

[gentoo-user] CFLAGS query

2005-01-25 Thread Nick Smith
i'm sorry to bring this up, im sure its been discussed countless times on here, but i keep getting conflicting information from everywhere i look, i was wondering if some people could clear up somethings for me. first i found this info on the wiki, i also have a p4 2.8Ghz w/HT running a mail serve