From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 5 01:30:06 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E76E61065670 for ; Sun, 5 Sep 2010 01:30:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC2818FC1A for ; Sun, 5 Sep 2010 01:30:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o851U5II048739 for ; Sun, 5 Sep 2010 01:30:05 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id o851U5Gw048733; Sun, 5 Sep 2010 01:30:05 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Sun, 5 Sep 2010 01:30:05 GMT Message-Id: <201009050130.o851U5Gw048733@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: "b. f." Cc: Subject: Re: conf/112997: [patch] Add note about the 'native' mtune option to share/examples/etc/make.conf X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: "b. f." List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2010 01:30:06 -0000 The following reply was made to PR conf/112997; it has been noted by GNATS. From: "b. f." To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Cc: Scot Hetzel Subject: Re: conf/112997: [patch] Add note about the 'native' mtune option to share/examples/etc/make.conf Date: Sun, 5 Sep 2010 01:22:03 +0000 It is very inefficient to invoke gcc, grep, and/or awk every time this makefile is processed. (In the past, we've gone to a great deal of trouble to avoid this kind of thing: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2008-July/049777.html http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-ports/2008-July/153224.html ) Instead, I think that comments in /etc/make.conf instructing users to how to correctly specify their CPUTYPE would be appropriate. The list of overrides for the base system compiler should be expanded, and perhaps relaxed if CC != cc. But _all_ overrides cannot be removed, and MACHINE_CPU cannot be expanded to include all features recognized by compilers from ports, because the kernel lacks the necessary support for things like SSE5/XOP+FMA4+CVT16, LWP, AVX, etc. b.