Subject: Re: fluxbox and -funroll-loops
To: None <>
From: Jan Schaumann <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 08/31/2004 10:30:12
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

"Johnny C. Lam" <> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 12:06:43AM +0200, Julio M. Merino Vidal wrote:
> >=20
> > I added -funroll-loops in my C{,XX}FLAGS and fluxbox doesn't compile.  =
> > in fact it compiles up to, but at that point gcc seems to ha=
> > (it has been running for more than eight minutes consuming cpu).  Remov=
> > the flag lets it compile very fast.
> If this is reproducible under a certain set of conditions, then
> committing a fix for this and adding a HACKS entry is appropriate.

I don't think that's necessary.  I don't believe that our packages
should try to compile every package with every possible CFLAG and then
add the necessary transforms just in case the user chooses to add that
CFLAG manually.

Are we going to add

BUILDLINK_TRANSFORM+=3D	rm:-illegal-flag

on the off chance that the user adds "-illegal-flag" to his/her CFLAGS?


(Unless, of course, I misunderstand the question and "-funroll-loops" is
actually added automatically to the CFLAGS by the package or by pkgsrc.)


Tradition is the illusion of permanence. -- Woody Allen

Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)