Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 06:25:17 +0200 From: hw <hw@adminart.net> To: Robert Huff <roberthuff@rcn.com> Cc: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What does it mean to use ports? Message-ID: <877e8jq5zm.fsf@toy.adminart.net> In-Reply-To: <23851.53207.561626.837532@jerusalem.litteratus.org> (Robert Huff's message of "Sun, 14 Jul 2019 20:59:03 -0400") References: <87o91wqjl5.fsf@toy.adminart.net> <20190715021053.2f82c84c.freebsd@edvax.de> <23851.53207.561626.837532@jerusalem.litteratus.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Robert Huff <roberthuff@rcn.com> writes: > Polytropon writes: > >> > Can I globally set compile options like -march=native (or >> > whatever the equivalent for FreeBSD is)? >> >> The file /etc/make.conf can be used for that. See "man 5 make.conf" >> for details. > > Verbum sapienti: be careful when you do this. The settings in > make.conf are used for _every_ compilation on the system - ports > ... and world ... and the kernel, Thanks for the warning --- Gentoo has something like that, too. Wouldn't I want everything to be optimized for the CPU it's running on? > I am still trying to find an exposition of the logic that > prevents a "/etc/ports.conf" as a sibling to "/etc/src.conf" and > make.conf. Perhaps it's not about logic. Having multiple global compile options overriding local ones on the same machine could entirely defeat the seamlessness of ports. That's assuming that there is such a seamlessness ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?877e8jq5zm.fsf>