Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 2 Sep 2001 16:30:47 -0500
From:      Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org>
To:        Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net>
Cc:        John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org, qa@FreeBSD.org, Eric Masson <e-masson@kisoft-services.com>
Subject:   Re: cputype=486
Message-ID:  <20010902163046.A26933@lerami.lerctr.org>
In-Reply-To: <20010902111131.B478@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net>
References:  <20010901114903.D11062@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> <XFMail.010901132212.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20010901161054.B13047@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> <20010902084832.B2510@lerami.lerctr.org> <20010902111131.B478@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> [010902 13:11]:
> On Sun, Sep 02, 2001 at 08:48:32AM -0500, Larry Rosenman wrote:
> > > Ah yes. In that case it only works if you link shared, but then you
> > > have different problems. I guess this rules out CPUTYPE as a generic
> > > tunable. If you want the highest possible performance, you give up
> > > on portibility. You can't have it both...
> > Is this a *NO*, we're not interested in fixing it? 
> 
> It isn't as simple as that. The problem is hairy. This means that
> it takes time to come up with a solution that is at least acceptable
> and it also takes time implementing it. Since a fix is not crucial
> to the proper functioning of FreeBSD, it will not compete for the
> highest slots on people's backlog.
So it's a very *LOW* priority, and won't be fixed soon,  if ever. 
> 
> > If so, some BIG notices should be in /etc/defaults/make.conf around
> > the CPUTYPE setting. 
> 
> What, besides the notice that setting CPUTYPE in /etc/make.conf is
> the worst of all possible places, are thinking about?
that if you are cross-building, CPUTYPE shouldn't be set, that CPUTYPE
being set to higher than the lowest processor you are building for
*WILL* break (give my example of i486 build on a P3 world if you
want), Or, remove the CPUTYPE option altogether until it can be made
cross-build safe. 

I was *VERY* surprised that a cross-build picked up *ANY* of the host
libraries for stuff running on the target.  My logical brain ass/u/med
that a cross-build was totally safe from the libraries on the host
box. 

Obviously, I can't force any of this.  Should I file a PR so it won't
get lost? 

I, obviously, have removed CPUTYPE from my make.conf for this setup. 

LER

-- 
Larry Rosenman                     http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 972-414-9812                 E-Mail: ler@lerctr.org
US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010902163046.A26933>