Re: Still a few flaws in configure's default CFLAGS selection
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Still a few flaws in configure's default CFLAGS selection |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200310271531.h9RFVx408853@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Still a few flaws in configure's default CFLAGS selection (Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Jan Wieck wrote: > >> >> > What Peter was advocating in that thread was that we enable -g by > >> >> > default *when building with gcc*. I have no problem with that, since > >> >> > there is (allegedly) no performance penalty for -g with gcc. However, > >> >> > the actual present behavior of our configure script is to default to -g > >> >> > for every compiler, and I think that that is a big mistake. On most > >> >> > non-gcc compilers, -g disables optimizations, which is way too high a > >> >> > price to pay for production use. > >> >> > >> >> You do realize that as of now, -g is the default for gcc? Was that the > >> >> intent? > >> > > >> > I was going to ask that myself. It seems strange to include -g by default --- > >> > we have --enable-debug, and that should control -g on all platforms. > >> > >> Could it be that there ought to be a difference between the defaults of > >> a devel CVS tree, a BETA tarball and a final "production" release? > > > > I am afraid that adds too much confusion to the debug situation. We > > have a flag to do -g; let people use it if they want it. > > > > Well, -g eats up some disk space, but for a gcc it doesn't need CPU > cycles or anything else. I doubt many people who pay the horrible > storage capacity overhead for PostgreSQL are that concerned about some > extra symbols stored with their binaries, but let's not argue about that > one. Well, people are stripping the executable, so some of them must care. In fact, if we enable -g by default for gcc, how do compile with default symbols? We would need another configure option. Strip is not the same as default symbols. > The other compiler flags like -O are much more important because the out > of the box configuration is the one we're allways blamed for. If it's > too hard to teach autoconf the difference between gcc and non-gcc, then > rip it. Sure, we can do it, but it is a question of consistency. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania19073
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: