Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 8 May 2001 16:29:54 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Mikhail Teterin <mi@misha.privatelabs.com>
To:        eric@FreeBSD.ORG
Cc:        mi@aldan.algebra.com, knu@iDaemons.org, will@physics.purdue.edu, sobomax@FreeBSD.ORG, kris@obsecurity.org, kris@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: port policies
Message-ID:  <200105082029.f48KTtC38076@misha.privatelabs.com>
In-Reply-To: <20010508122714.B48723@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On  8 May, Eric Melville wrote:
>> All/most optimizations are done to work better in the _average_ case,
>> while  still working  acceptably in  the worst  cases. It  remains my
>> believe, that  -j2 on  a single-CPU machine  will _always_  work, and
>> on  _average_  will work  better.  I'll  be  interested in  seeing  a
>> counter-example, but  I must  ask for NOT  mentioning Redmond  in any
>> rebbutals.  Note,  that  simply  working slower  with  -j2  does  not
>> qualify.
>
> Don't do things that the user didn't ask to be done.
>
> If the user  wants more excitment, we provide facilities  that make it
> easy to do so.

The  user did  not ask  for ``-O  -pipe'' in  the CFLAGS  either. -pipe,
consumes  more  memory, while  -O  makes  compiling longer.  Should  the
default CFLAGS be empty too? By your logic, they should...

	-mi


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200105082029.f48KTtC38076>