Le Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 09:59:20PM -0600, Steve M. Robbins a écrit : > > As you say, it could be worthwhile to benchmark to see whether the > extra optimization is useful. But benchmarking is a tricky business: > it can be hard to benchmark all use cases of the software (I have no > idea what "velvet" is, so I'm only speaking in generalities). So one > might be inclined rather to follow upstream here. What would be the > harm?
It would harm my lazyness :) For the moment, debian/rules is only four lines, and automagically takes care of the "noopt" option of DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS. This option goes through CFLAGS, which come before OPT in Upstream's makefile, so leaving Upstrem's default breaks DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS. I of course can rewrite debian/rules from scratch using Debhelper. I admit that it I am not comptent enought to pick the best optimisation level. In a very interseting thread on -devel it was even noticed that -Os could be the fastest when the difference in size was just enough for the program to fit on the processor's cache. The reverse is said elsewhere to be true for -O3… I will do what Upstream thinks and let you know. Have a nice Sunday, -- Charles Plessy Debian Med packaging team, http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
