cvs commit: ports/graphics/libraw Makefile

Jeremy Messenger mezz7 at cox.net
Wed May 7 21:47:08 UTC 2008


On Wed, 07 May 2008 15:22:18 -0500, Sergey A. Osokin <osa at FreeBSD.org>  
wrote:

> On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 02:20:51PM -0500, Jeremy Messenger wrote:
>> On Wed, 07 May 2008 08:06:12 -0500, Sergey A. Osokin <osa at FreeBSD.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >osa         2008-05-07 13:06:12 UTC
>> >
>> >  FreeBSD ports repository
>> >
>> >  Modified files:
>> >    graphics/libraw      Makefile
>> >  Log:
>> >  Add documentation and examples.
>> >  Also, add compile optimization. [*]
>> >  Bump PORTREVISION.
>>
>> There is no such of -O4 in GCC document. You should change it to make
>> sense, -O3.
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.2.3/gcc/Optimize-Options.html
>
> I've talk about compile optimization with libraw author and he said he  
> using
> gcc 3.x and 4.x and his optimization works like a charm.
> I'm also test -O4 on my FreeBSD 6.2-S box and under 8.0-C on amd64  
> (sledge).
>
> Jeremy, do you have any problem with compiling libraw?

There is no problem and I am not using it. The -O4 and above are same as  
with -O3, so it doesn't make any sense for anyone to get above than -O3  
since it doesn't exists in ideal. Why not add -O3 instead of -O4 to be  
more realistic? Also, avoid the blindspot when GCC addes -O4 in future  
that might break other application that use libraw. It can makes difficult  
to debug.

> I'm also Cc'ed this letter to libraw author Alex Tutubalin.
> Alex, could you provide more information about compile optimization?

The URL of GCC docuement isn't good enough? Unless there is an unoffical  
-O4 patch? Feel free to correct me.

It's only a suggest, so the choice is your.

Cheers,
Mezz

> Thank you.


-- 
mezz7 at cox.net  -  mezz at FreeBSD.org
FreeBSD GNOME Team
http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/  -  gnome at FreeBSD.org


More information about the cvs-ports mailing list