Re: Default optimization of rust ports

From: Daniel Engberg <>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2022 18:17:00 UTC
On 2022-09-16 19:42, Mark Millard wrote:
>> Mark Millard <> escreveu no dia sábado, 10/09/2022
>> à(s) 12:53:
>>> Daniel Engberg <> wrote on
>>> Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2022 09:45:21 UTC :
>>>> Since there is work and general interest regarding optimization 
>>>> would
>>>> it
>>>> make sense to make LTO and possibly CODEGEN_UNITS=1 opt-out while we
>>>> still have a fairly manageable amount of ports using Rust?
>>> Just making sure I understand the wording:
>>> So, in part, you are requesting that the FreeBSD build servers build
>>> using LTO and CODEGEN_UNITS=1? (Those build servers always use the
>>> defaults as I understand. Thus, the defaults are set to what is
>>> desired for use on the build servers, if I understand right. Other
>>> contexts that happen to want something different override some
>>> default(s): opt out of the defaults.)
>> . . .
>> Hi,
>> The suggestion is to make it default for all ports but we can (and
>> should) make it opt-out as not all outcomes might be favourable.
> opt-out per port? Just globally (all such ports at once)?
> (Automatic rebuilds if the opt-out status has changed, at least
> in poudriere?)
>> These are ENV variables so one wouldn't need to touch individual 
>> ports.
> The ports infrastructure does not have OPTIONS at a more global
> level than per-port, as far as I know. (OPTION changes do lead to
> automatic rebuilds, at least in poudriere.)
> Opting-out of a global ENV definition would be to globally unset the 
> involved, as far as I can tell.
> But may be I've misunderstood the details being suggested.
> ===
> Mark Millard
> marklmi at


You could do something like USES= cargo:noopt to not apply optimization 
in case it breaks something.

Best regards,