mozilla's install hanging on amd64
Jose M Rodriguez
josemi at freebsd.jazztel.es
Mon Apr 11 13:34:55 PDT 2005
El Monday 11 April 2005 21:44, Roman Neuhauser escribió:
> # scottl at samsco.org / 2005-04-11 10:34:48 -0600:
> > Mikhail Teterin wrote:
> > >My whole point, Scott, is that there is nothing special about "my
> > > gcc flags". NOTHING. Setting CPUTYPE to match one's processor
> > > flavor is a long-documented way to do things -- fact. Such
> > > setting results in the corresponding -march=XXX automatically --
> > > fact. All ports must handle this. Those that can not are broken.
> > > Plan and simple. There is nothing to argue: `-O -pipe
> > > -march=opteron' must work.
> I think this thread shows that there is a need for a written
> policy on -march / -mcpu / -mtune gcc options in ports. Heated
> discussions like this one could be avoided if the Porters Handbook
> included an article or chapter on this.
And more work in /usr/share/mk/bsd.cpu.mk. Beggining with a way to take
in account what gcc will be used (we can't use -mtune for gcc
And a more conservative approach (-march=pentium/pentiun-mmx/i686 and
-mtune/-mcpu to the real cpu).
But my skill are not in the way. I prefer cut CFLAGS in conflictive
> Whether that policy was "-march= must work" or "-march= is
> unsupported" or "ports should filter out -march= if they break
> with it, patches for -march-related bugs welcome" (most reasonable
> IMNSHO) would be a matter of consensus, but would be a boon to have.
> MFT set to ports@ and doc at .
More information about the freebsd-ports