From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 11 19:44:43 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E71A16A4CE; Mon, 11 Apr 2005 19:44:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from isis.sigpipe.cz (r2g224.chello.upc.cz [62.245.70.224]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E411343D4C; Mon, 11 Apr 2005 19:44:41 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from neuhauser@sigpipe.cz) Received: by isis.sigpipe.cz (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 79D371F87BEF; Mon, 11 Apr 2005 21:44:39 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 21:44:39 +0200 From: Roman Neuhauser To: Scott Long Message-ID: <20050411194439.GA98521@isis.sigpipe.cz> Mail-Followup-To: ports@freebsd.org, doc@freebsd.org References: <200504102137.j3ALbm0h079084@corbulon.video-collage.com> <200504111212.25215.mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com> <425AA274.2090604@samsco.org> <200504111229.39072.mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com> <425AA728.7050809@samsco.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <425AA728.7050809@samsco.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i cc: ports@freebsd.org cc: Mikhail Teterin cc: doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mozilla's install hanging on amd64 X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Documentation project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 19:44:43 -0000 # scottl@samsco.org / 2005-04-11 10:34:48 -0600: > Mikhail Teterin wrote: > >My whole point, Scott, is that there is nothing special about "my gcc > >flags". NOTHING. Setting CPUTYPE to match one's processor flavor is a > >long-documented way to do things -- fact. Such setting results in the > >corresponding -march=XXX automatically -- fact. All ports must handle > >this. Those that can not are broken. Plan and simple. There is nothing to > >argue: `-O -pipe -march=opteron' must work. (...) > Is my car broken because it can't go 300km/hr? A Porshe can, so > shouldn't mine be able to? My point here is that there is a distinction > between the mozilla port being completely broken, and being broken in > non-standard or specific configurations. Saying that it's BROKEN > implies that it's 100% unusable, and that gives a false summary of the > problem. I built it from scratch with a very stock, unmodified system > and it works as well for me as I would expect. In my eyes, it's not > broken. But I don't play with custom gcc options. > > I'll readily concede that there are a lot of ports that are authored > in an i386-specific way and only work on amd64 by sheer luck. > Understnad that FreeBSD tends to also be at the leading edge of compiler > development. While we are using GCC 3.4, many other BSD and Linux > variants are still using 3.1, 3.2, or even 2.95. So it's quite possible > that the newer compiler has either bugs or stricter languange > compliance, and there aren't enough eyes yet to discover and fix these > problems. Shouting to everyone that mozilla is BROKEN doesn't help this > very much. I think this thread shows that there is a need for a written policy on -march / -mcpu / -mtune gcc options in ports. Heated discussions like this one could be avoided if the Porters Handbook included an article or chapter on this. Whether that policy was "-march= must work" or "-march= is unsupported" or "ports should filter out -march= if they break with it, patches for -march-related bugs welcome" (most reasonable IMNSHO) would be a matter of consensus, but would be a boon to have. MFT set to ports@ and doc@. -- How many Vietnam vets does it take to screw in a light bulb? You don't know, man. You don't KNOW. Cause you weren't THERE. http://bash.org/?255991