On Thu, 6 Oct 2005, Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
leave. And I had expected one of the server admins to delete my account on
belg... but that never happened... :)
The server knows the future.
Steven
--
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
And I had expected one of the server admins to delete my
account on belg... but that never happened... :)
That's 'cause we all knew you were bluffing! *ducks* :)
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 6 Oct 2005, Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
Guess that's what I get by trying to follow a thread through the news
server.
Have you tried "get all new messages"? *ducks*
I unsubscribed from the lfs-dev mailing list (and all the others, except
I somehow missed patch
On Thu, 6 Oct 2005, Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
Guess that's what I get by trying to follow a thread through the news server.
Have you tried "get all new messages"? *ducks*
Steven
--
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: Se
Andrew Benton wrote:
Dan Nicholson made this point and Tushar answered it a couple of hours ago
Guess that's what I get by trying to follow a thread through the news
server. Thanks, Andrew.
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/f
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
Tushar Teredesai wrote:
glibc: -Os -march=i686 -mtune=i686 -pipe -w
From 'man gcc', in the section called "Intel 386 and AMD x86-64 Options":
"-march=cpu-type
Generate instructions for the machine type cpu-type. The
choices for cpu-type are the same as fo
Tushar Teredesai wrote:
glibc: -Os -march=i686 -mtune=i686 -pipe -w
From 'man gcc', in the section called "Intel 386 and AMD x86-64 Options":
"-march=cpu-type
Generate instructions for the machine type cpu-type. The
choices for cpu-type are the same as for -mtune. Moreover, spec
On 10/6/05, Matthew Burgess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tushar Teredesai wrote:
>
> > Anyways, the point of my thread is not to decide which flags are ok
> > for glibc but that the warning in the book should be removed. It could
> > probably be reworded to state that -march options may cause probl
On 10/6/05, Mike Hernandez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/6/05, Dan Nicholson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Just finished all 3. Here was my experience. Hardware is PIII with
>
> Did you try using the 3 (e.g. to build something else) or just run the
> tests? I'm sure the tests are helpful bu
On 10/6/05, Dan Nicholson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just finished all 3. Here was my experience. Hardware is PIII with
Did you try using the 3 (e.g. to build something else) or just run the
tests? I'm sure the tests are helpful but I would be reluctant to
spend time building them all if I did
> Just finished all 3. Here was my experience.
Oops, forgot versions.
glibc-2.3.5, gcc-3.4.4, binutils-2.16.1
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
On 10/6/05, Matthew Burgess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do the similar warnings for binutils and gcc need removing too, or is it
> just glibc that is pretty agnostic with regards to optimisation options?
Just finished all 3. Here was my experience. Hardware is PIII with
512 MB RAM, Intel i810 c
Tushar Teredesai wrote:
Anyways, the point of my thread is not to decide which flags are ok
for glibc but that the warning in the book should be removed. It could
probably be reworded to state that -march options may cause problems.
Do the similar warnings for binutils and gcc need removing to
On 10/6/05, Dan Nicholson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/5/05, Tushar Teredesai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I have been building glibc for ages now with CFLAGS=CXXFLAGS="-Os
> > -march=i686 -mtune=i686 -pipe -w" for ages now without any problems.
>
> Just built 2.3.5 with -O3 -march=i686
On 10/5/05, Tushar Teredesai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hola:
>
> I have been building glibc for ages now with CFLAGS=CXXFLAGS="-Os
> -march=i686 -mtune=i686 -pipe -w" for ages now without any problems.
Just built 2.3.5 with -O3 -march=i686 -pipe and all the tests passed.
Didn't like it when I
Tushar Teredesai schrieb:
> I have been building glibc for ages now with CFLAGS=CXXFLAGS="-Os
> -march=i686 -mtune=i686 -pipe -w" for ages now without any problems.
> Is it time to remove the obsolete note about unsetting CFLAGS and
> CXXFLAGS from the glibc instructions?
What about the -fomit-fra
On Thu, 6 Oct 2005, Tushar Teredesai wrote:
Is it time to remove the obsolete note about unsetting CFLAGS and
CXXFLAGS from the glibc instructions?
As a user I feel that every package should build correctly with envvars as
thin as possible. I'm jealous about my envvars.
BTW, Greg S. has t
Hola:
I have been building glibc for ages now with CFLAGS=CXXFLAGS="-Os
-march=i686 -mtune=i686 -pipe -w" for ages now without any problems.
Is it time to remove the obsolete note about unsetting CFLAGS and
CXXFLAGS from the glibc instructions?
BTW, Greg S. has the following quote in his book: "
18 matches
Mail list logo
