From owner-freebsd-current Mon Nov 18 12: 0:11 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E01BB37B401 for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 12:00:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from sax.sax.de (sax.sax.de [193.175.26.33]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 331F243E3B for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 12:00:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from j@uriah.heep.sax.de) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by sax.sax.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with UUCP id VAA19080; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 21:00:04 +0100 (CET) Received: from uriah.heep.sax.de (localhost.heep.sax.de [127.0.0.1]) by uriah.heep.sax.de (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id gAIJvPWc071286; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 20:57:25 +0100 (MET) (envelope-from j@uriah.heep.sax.de) Received: (from j@localhost) by uriah.heep.sax.de (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id gAIJvOVU071285; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 20:57:24 +0100 (MET) (envelope-from j) Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 20:57:24 +0100 From: Joerg Wunsch To: Kris Kennaway Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: CPUTYPE cr*p (Was: [kris@FreeBSD.org: 5.0-CURRENT build failure of ports you maintain]) Message-ID: <20021118205724.A64225@uriah.heep.sax.de> Reply-To: Joerg Wunsch References: <20021118141458.D50308@uriah.heep.sax.de> <20021118191126.GB24116@rot13.obsecurity.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20021118191126.GB24116@rot13.obsecurity.org>; from kris@obsecurity.org on Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 11:11:27AM -0800 X-Phone: +49-351-2012 669 X-PGP-Fingerprint: DC 47 E6 E4 FF A6 E9 8F 93 21 E0 7D F9 12 D6 4E Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG As Kris Kennaway wrote: > > What am i supposed to do in order to get cross-compilation working > > properly? > > NO_CPU_CFLAGS=yes > > This is documented in make.conf. At least not in my version of make.conf's man page. Just checked, neither in the current version. I (and obviously not only I) wish that'd be the default though. Oh, it would obviate a flaw with the naming choice (the same as with NO_KERNELCLEAN, NO_KERNELDEPEND, NO_MODULES, ...): negative options are evil. You cannot set ?= them in your make.conf, and override the actual value from the command line. But some people seem to be proud about all this these days. I still don't buy is worth all these hassles. If the compiler should now default to say pentium code, why not change the compiler's default but invent such a complicated structure, and leave it to the people who want to pessimize their own code by adding it manually to CFLAGS in make.conf? Guess time to look for a cleaner OS. How's jkhBSD going now? :-) -- cheers, J"org .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DTL http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message