Alternative option for solving Fedora i686 vs geode problems

[Tiago Marques]

Ups, I missed the last part.
As you say, leaving CFLAGS intact will probably make -i586 problem free.

Tiago

On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 11:38 PM, Tiago Marques <tiagomnm at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 5:27 AM, Daniel Drake <dsd at laptop.org> wrote:
>
>> On 7 June 2010 20:05, James Cameron <quozl at laptop.org> wrote:
>> > You are placing far more trust in a trivial rebuild than I would.  Once
>> > Fedora ceases testing the actual instruction streams we will be using,
>> > we will be providing the testing instead.  There are some interesting
>> > classes of bugs that this would influence.
>>
>> After years of working with Gentoo linux where practically every user
>> has their own CFLAGS, I can say that problems like this are uncommon,
>> at least in my experience.
>>
>> The only cases where CFLAGS differences cause miscompilations that
>> I've seen have been related to using the more exotic CFLAGS, or users
>> being downright stupid.
>>
>> I don't imagine we'd see any issues from changing from -march=i686 to
>> -march=i586.
>>
>
> Gentoo does one thing Fedora won't(I think), which is to filter out
> harmless CFLAGS that cause problems with some packages. You could always
> look into Gentoo's ebuilds if an error like that is suspected but I agree
> that it will be mostly a non-issue.
> The biggest "similar" problem I faced was using a 3.4 compiler where a
> package only compiled well to 4.1+.
>
> Best regards,
> Tiago
>
>
>>
>> Daniel
>> _______________________________________________
>> Devel mailing list
>> Devel at lists.laptop.org
>> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100609/74e6952d/attachment.html>