Compiler optimization flags in building LFS-5.1.1
zmerch at 30below.com
Wed Sep 8 13:20:42 PDT 2004
Rumor has it that Kevin Jordan may have mentioned these words:
>I wouldn't put optimizations on binutils, gcc, glibc, or grub. I
>forgot once and compiled with optimizations on grub and the hd numbers
>turned out strangely (i.e. something like 10604029340 or another
>ridiculously large number) and so it wouldn't let me do anything.
>Found out later optimizing it messed it up. I suppose something like
>this would happen for the others that are not recommended you put
>flags on. My flags are "-march=athlon-xp -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer
>-msse -mmmx -m3dnow" and have worked well for me.
Here's a related question:
When one uses the -Os switch, does it result in a smaller RAM profile (for
the code, of course - I realize it won't affect data) or is the memory
profile once loaded negligible?
I want to put a new LFS on Flash, but am also wondering if it'll help my
Spamassassin a bit as well... (having a [hopefully] smaller Perl
Roger "Merch" Merchberger
Roger "Merch" Merchberger --- sysadmin, Iceberg Computers
Recycling is good, right??? Randomization is better!!!
If at first you don't succeed, nuclear warhead
disarmament should *not* be your first career choice.
More information about the lfs-support