Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 00:45:29 +0200 From: George Liaskos <geo.liaskos@gmail.com> To: Alexander Best <arundel@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: r219385 build error. Message-ID: <AANLkTinfQv3y0yohB4qtRL9JOktqa76SvB%2Bw0WpEzAXh@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20110307214935.GA53914@freebsd.org> References: <AANLkTikc-Z9mjmQ7EWnWdqz297hHQ_Kt2k9z05FaNv-y@mail.gmail.com> <20110307205957.GA47557@freebsd.org> <AANLkTimJpsr=38UPswCXUmajNixTs1qS-8FxT36xAK4V@mail.gmail.com> <20110307214935.GA53914@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> either "native" or "nocona" (actually native should evaluate to nocona): > > touch _native_test.c && gcc -march=native -### _native_test.c > > should tell which -march and -mtune settings gcc assumes for "native". > > indeed there are some known problems with "native", but i think those are > limited to architectures such as mips and arm. with i386 or amd64 "native" > shouldn't cause any problems. > > i think core2 was always wrong to set in make.conf, because the base gcc simply > does not support it. however so many people are trying to boost speed etc. by > adding make.conf options they find scattered over the internet and on various > linux dist wikis, that core2 was added as a workaround so people could use it > (even though it wasn't supported). I still don't understand how bsd.cpu.mk is going to handle "native" as value to set CPUTYPE / MACHINE_CPU, or this is irrelevant? Would it be better to use the following? CPUTYPE?=nocona NO_CPU_CFLAGS=yes NO_CPU_COPTFLAGS=yes CFLAGS+= -march=native Thank you for your clarifications.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTinfQv3y0yohB4qtRL9JOktqa76SvB%2Bw0WpEzAXh>