Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 22:42:48 +1000 From: Robert Backhaus <robbak@gmail.com> To: Jeremie Le Hen <jeremie@le-hen.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, thierry@herbelot.com Subject: Re: HEADS UP: Ports are not ready for CFLAGS=-O2 in 6.0 Message-ID: <d449958050706054235ddd81a@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20050706122110.GC39292@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> References: <20041102222000.GA65845@xor.obsecurity.org> <20050706073205.GA942@galgenberg.net> <20050706085737.GT73907@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> <200507061116.17267.thierry@herbelot.com> <d44995805070604116064805@mail.gmail.com> <20050706122110.GC39292@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 7/6/05, Jeremie Le Hen <jeremie@le-hen.org> wrote: > Hi Robert, >=20 > > Of course, the _correct_ way to fix this is for the ports that are now > > broken by -O2 to be fixed by forcing -O in their makefiles, which > > really should have been done from the beginning. >=20 > I agree that the correct way to fix ports broken with -O2 is to force > -O in their makefiles, but this does not say that having something > like PORTS_CFLAGS would be a bad idea, does it ? >=20 > Regards, > -- > Jeremie Le Hen No, not at all: A useful extra feature for those who, for instance, wish to use increased -O levels for ports.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?d449958050706054235ddd81a>