Re: Default optimization of rust ports

> Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> escreveu no dia sábado, 10/09/2022 
> à(s) 12:53:
> 
>> Daniel Engberg <diizzy_at_FreeBSD.org> wrote on
>> Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2022 09:45:21 UTC :
>> 
>>> Since there is work and general interest regarding optimization would 
>>> it
>>> make sense to make LTO and possibly CODEGEN_UNITS=1 opt-out while we
>>> still have a fairly manageable amount of ports using Rust?
>> 
>> Just making sure I understand the wording:
>> 
>> So, in part, you are requesting that the FreeBSD build servers build
>> using LTO and CODEGEN_UNITS=1? (Those build servers always use the
>> defaults as I understand. Thus, the defaults are set to what is
>> desired for use on the build servers, if I understand right. Other
>> contexts that happen to want something different override some
>> default(s): opt out of the defaults.)
>> 
>. . .
> 
> Hi,
> 
> The suggestion is to make it default for all ports but we can (and 
> should) make it opt-out as not all outcomes might be favourable.

opt-out per port? Just globally (all such ports at once)?

(Automatic rebuilds if the opt-out status has changed, at least
in poudriere?)

> These are ENV variables so one wouldn't need to touch individual ports.

The ports infrastructure does not have OPTIONS at a more global
level than per-port, as far as I know. (OPTION changes do lead to
automatic rebuilds, at least in poudriere.)

Opting-out of a global ENV definition would be to globally unset the ENV
involved, as far as I can tell.

But may be I've misunderstood the details being suggested.


===
Mark Millard
marklmi at yahoo.com