From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 8 15:33:39 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE8D21065695 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2011 15:33:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cvs-src@yandex.ru) Received: from forward11.mail.yandex.net (forward11.mail.yandex.net [95.108.130.93]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CD8D8FC14 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2011 15:33:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp11.mail.yandex.net (smtp11.mail.yandex.net [95.108.130.67]) by forward11.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id 91D3323F9970; Tue, 8 Feb 2011 18:33:37 +0300 (MSK) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail; t=1297179217; bh=/bEqKfmBO2M8i7j7wDjNdMLTf1uBRwbubQFHjz7x5OY=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=FsqCkhI0lURO3SoaivD7/mfTkl3GhmpFW1XjRlhNDaWjMqNYo9lbg8Z/ljNmFJ9S6 bqYEQi+cDoh8nbqfokfeA0Y4y0lk2H5F5MrUL1C50arMXBS+CeErMVPzkIJeX4r498 YIWeibfd/yXG1hpGNHJUZOJEQMix7GEVklhYzDjQ= Received: from smeshariki2.local (unknown [213.27.65.65]) by smtp11.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTPSA id 4AB6D4CC00BE; Tue, 8 Feb 2011 18:33:37 +0300 (MSK) Message-ID: <4D516207.1090704@yandex.ru> Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2011 18:32:23 +0300 From: Ruslan Mahmatkhanov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; ru-RU; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20110106 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bf1783@gmail.com References: <4D5052A9.9000009@yandex.ru> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: How to not use OPTIMIZED_FLAGS properly X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2011 15:33:39 -0000 07.02.2011 23:52, b. f. пишет: > On 2/7/11, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote: > ... >> Yes. I get it wrong what Konstantin and portlint are said. Sorry. >> CFLAGS=-O0 out of CONFIGURE_ENV works just fine. Thanks. > > Note that CFLAGS=-O0 is (even) more restrictive than CFLAGS+=-O0 -- > the latter just overrides the -On setting for n> 0, while the former > also overrides all other user flags. Generally speaking, the latter > should be preferred, as part of our attempt to honor user-defined > CFLAGS. Yes. So i decide to stick with Cyrille suggestion and use CFLAGS:= ${CFLAGS:N-O*:N-pipe} CXXFLAGS:= ${CXXFLAGS:N-O*:N-pipe} to avoid just -O and -pipe while keeping other user defined flags untouched. > ... >>> This seems pessimistic, by the way. Have you tried adding other >>> compiler flags, like those to control the compiler's memory usage? Or >>> using another compiler via USE_GCC, or patching the source code? > ... >> Yes, i tried different flags that affect gcc memory usage, but w/o any >> success. I'm actually started from patching source code - removing >> optimization flags from distribution Makefiles. > > That's a start. But I think that this needs more investigation, > beginning with the code that causes the base system compiler to become > a hog. Yes, but i'm not sure that i skilled enough in things like that, i just can say that it doesn't working with optimization flags, and working without. There is updated (and i believe finished) version of port: http://happy-nation.by.ru/ports/gimp-gmic-plugin.shar.txt If anybody can test or review - that's would be great. Thanks. -- Regards, Ruslan