Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 10:34:48 -0600 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: Mikhail Teterin <mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com> Cc: gnome@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mozilla's install hanging on amd64 Message-ID: <425AA728.7050809@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <200504111229.39072.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> References: <200504102137.j3ALbm0h079084@corbulon.video-collage.com> <200504111212.25215.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> <425AA274.2090604@samsco.org> <200504111229.39072.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mikhail Teterin wrote: >>I don't really care to argue with you on this. If you want to be upset >>that your special gcc flags don't work, that's your business. > > > My whole point, Scott, is that there is nothing special about "my gcc flags". > NOTHING. Setting CPUTYPE to match one's processor flavor is a long-documented > way to do things -- fact. Such setting results in the corresponding > -march=XXX automatically -- fact. All ports must handle this. Those that can > not are broken. Plan and simple. There is nothing to argue: `-O -pipe > -march=opteron' must work. > > >>Meanwhile I'll continue using Mozilla on my amd64 machine. > > > Even a broken thing can be useful to some. > Is my car broken because it can't go 300km/hr? A Porshe can, so shouldn't mine be able to? My point here is that there is a distinction between the mozilla port being completely broken, and being broken in non-standard or specific configurations. Saying that it's BROKEN implies that it's 100% unusable, and that gives a false summary of the problem. I built it from scratch with a very stock, unmodified system and it works as well for me as I would expect. In my eyes, it's not broken. But I don't play with custom gcc options. I'll readily concede that there are a lot of ports that are authored in an i386-specific way and only work on amd64 by sheer luck. Understnad that FreeBSD tends to also be at the leading edge of compiler development. While we are using GCC 3.4, many other BSD and Linux variants are still using 3.1, 3.2, or even 2.95. So it's quite possible that the newer compiler has either bugs or stricter languange compliance, and there aren't enough eyes yet to discover and fix these problems. Shouting to everyone that mozilla is BROKEN doesn't help this very much. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?425AA728.7050809>