View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
peat.psuwit n00b
Joined: 21 Jan 2013 Posts: 2
|
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:20 pm Post subject: Why sys-devel/gcc-4.5.4 filter -Os, -O1, -O0, --param CFLAGS |
|
|
I use those flags for workaround from gcc being killed. (My system is Samsung Galaxy Mini, ARMv6 with 280MB of ram but Android use most of it.) This is my CFLAGS set in /etc/make.conf :
CFALGS = "--param gcc-min-expand=0 --param gcc-min-heapsize=8192 -march=armv6j -mtune=arm1136j-s -mfpu=vfp -mfloat-abi=softfp -Os"
(BTW, "emerge --info" also give me this result)
But when I decide to compile gcc (Actual command : "emerge --update --newuse -v gcc"), it tell me this :
CFLAGS = "-march=armv6j -mtune=arm1136j-s -mfpu=vfp -mfloat-abi=softfp -O2"
(I also replace -Os with -O1 and -O0 but result is the same.)
I can't compile gcc because gcc get killed in 2nd stage and I can't update other package because this will be part of dependency tree, in early position. _________________ I'm student from Thailand. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Genone Retired Dev
Joined: 14 Mar 2003 Posts: 9532 Location: beyond the rim
|
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 9:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Some ebuilds (esp. for toolchain packages) will filter all but a few known flags as unexpected flags often cause trouble with them. Unfortunately I don't see an easy way to override this for your case as the toolchain packages have most of their code deeply nested in eclasses. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
peat.psuwit n00b
Joined: 21 Jan 2013 Posts: 2
|
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 4:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks to Genone for the information.
But I think filtering the lower optimisation flag to higher one sound strange and doesn't make sense for me(ex. Filter -O1 to -O2). Why? _________________ I'm student from Thailand. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|