Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 13:54:09 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> Cc: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Overriding compiler flags (Re: cvs commit: src/contrib/gcc.295 gcc.c) Message-ID: <20010530135408.A3587@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20010530163906.27321380E@overcee.netplex.com.au>; from peter@wemm.org on Wed, May 30, 2001 at 09:39:06AM -0700 References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0105302323390.18042-100000@besplex.bde.org> <20010530163906.27321380E@overcee.netplex.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 09:39:06AM -0700, Peter Wemm wrote: > > I agree. It got ugly already :-). And we don't even install the specs > > file in /usr/libdata/gcc. > > Yes, because it just slows things down since gcc has to parse the file. > Maybe we should install /usr/libdata/gcc/specs.default or something? I have > found using the specs file *very* useful in the past when working on > toolchain issues. I personally don't want to install any specs. I want to keep things deterministic. When Peter uses specs I can be assured that any bug reports or "something is wrong" emails were tested with the stock case, or clearly identified as not being stock. I cannot depend on this from all users. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010530135408.A3587>