Difference between revisions of "Talk:Makepkg.conf"

From ArchWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Mistakes and Confusion)
m (Mistakes and Confusion)
Line 51: Line 51:
  
 
:I'm not sure which site to trust. Gentoo's article says "prescott" should be used for atom, which is false (atom should use core2). This leads me to believe that they might have other stuff wrong.
 
:I'm not sure which site to trust. Gentoo's article says "prescott" should be used for atom, which is false (atom should use core2). This leads me to believe that they might have other stuff wrong.
:To be honest I much rather delete this article and place a mention of "-march=native" in the main makepkg article. It has been working with Arch's gcc for a long time, and it's a whole lot simpler. This article is unnecessary.
+
:To be honest I much rather delete this article and place a mention of "-march=native" in the main makepkg article. It has been working with Arch's gcc for a long time, and it's a whole lot simpler. This article is unnecessary... it might be useful for corss compilation but that's a corner case and it doesn't fit the wiki intended audience.
 
:--[[User:Pacmanz|Pacmanz]] 11:11, 30 October 2009 (EDT)
 
:--[[User:Pacmanz|Pacmanz]] 11:11, 30 October 2009 (EDT)

Revision as of 15:13, 30 October 2009

New versions of gcc support -mrach=native which detects which architecture to use at build time. This seems to be the best solution since users may be confused about their hardware or new architecture types are added to gcc for new processers march will continue to work. I am not an expert about gcc and wondering if there is a reason not to replace the whole discussion of architecture with -march=native and be done with it.


Why does not x86-64 + "Core 2 Duo/Quad/Xeon/Pentium 4 P6xx" have -fomit-frame-pointer?


---

I have a 64-bit quad core xeon (x3360). Should I use nocona or core2? This wiki tells me I should use both - I'm confused:

Core 2 Duo/Quad/Xeon/Pentium 4 P6xx
* x86-64 
CHOST="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu"
CFLAGS="-march=nocona -O2 -pipe"
CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}"
[...]
Note: for gcc 4.3.0 for Core2Duo (or Core2Quad) and x86_64 set CFLAGS="-march=core2 -O2 -pipe"

Which part of the text should I listen to? I think a rewrite of that part would be great.

--Trontonic 08:25, 26 March 2009 (EDT)

AMD Turion 64 Mobile?

cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep "model name"
model name	: AMD Turion(tm) 64 Mobile Technology MK-36

Should I use the Athlon 64 settings? --Matthewbauer 23:17, 27 July 2009 (EDT)

According to Gentoo wiki, Turion setting is as follows (not same as Athlon 64):

== Turion64 / X2 / Ultra ==

32 bit:

CHOST="i686-pc-linux-gnu"
CFLAGS="-march=athlon-xp -msse3 -O2 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer"
CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}"

64 bit:

CHOST="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu"
CFLAGS="-march=k8 -msse3 -O2 -pipe"
CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}"
--Blowback 04:16, 28 July 2009 (EDT)


Mistakes and Confusion

I'd almost say we should copy the gentoo wiki in this area, it is much more complete in this area and it does a much better job of avoiding confusion. --JonimusPrime 10:17, 30 October 2009 (EDT)

I'm not sure which site to trust. Gentoo's article says "prescott" should be used for atom, which is false (atom should use core2). This leads me to believe that they might have other stuff wrong.
To be honest I much rather delete this article and place a mention of "-march=native" in the main makepkg article. It has been working with Arch's gcc for a long time, and it's a whole lot simpler. This article is unnecessary... it might be useful for corss compilation but that's a corner case and it doesn't fit the wiki intended audience.
--Pacmanz 11:11, 30 October 2009 (EDT)