From owner-freebsd-stable Tue Mar 13 3:34:30 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from eve.framatome.fr (eve.framatome.fr [195.101.50.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBF0137B71A for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2001 03:34:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ubc@paris.framatome.fr) Received: from localhost (ubc@localhost) by eve.framatome.fr (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA10035; Tue, 13 Mar 2001 12:34:21 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from ubc@paris.framatome.fr) Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 12:34:21 +0100 (CET) From: Claude Buisson X-Sender: ubc@eve.framatome.fr To: Jordan Hubbard Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ARCH flag in new make.conf In-Reply-To: <20010312182203N.jkh@osd.bsdi.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > From: Claude Buisson > Subject: Re: ARCH flag in new make.conf > Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2001 11:51:47 +0100 (CET) > > > If CPUTYPE is potentially dangerous, why make its use automatic ? needing > > a special flag (commented OUT in /etc/default/make.conf) to deny it. > > It's not automatic. I don't see how or why you think that it is? > Yes I was under the false impression that it was automatic, and the existence of NO_CPU_CFLAGS contributed to it. Having done may home work, this impression has been corrected. But I persist in thinking that there is a role for a NO_CPU_CFLAGS or alike being set at the individual program level. > > Please, revert the default: do NOT use CPUTYPE optimization in a standard > > That is the default. I don't need to revert anything. :) > > - Jordan > Claude Buisson To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message