Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 10 Jan 2000 23:46:40 -0500
From:      Coleman Kane <cokane@one.net>
To:        "David O'Brien" <obrien@NUXI.com>
Cc:        Coleman Kane <cokane@one.net>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: When does the 4.x branch go stable?
Message-ID:  <20000110234640.A98425@evil.2y.net>
In-Reply-To: <20000110203645.D62163@dragon.nuxi.com>; from obrien@NUXI.com on Mon, Jan 10, 2000 at 11:37:25PM -0500
References:  <20000109214046.7913BA54DB@netcom1.netcom.com> <Pine.A41.4.10.10001091547130.91952-100000@dante24.u.washington.edu> <20000110004054.A1181@evil.2y.net> <20000110094834.D94525@relay.nuxi.com> <20000110153703.A19250@evil.2y.net> <20000110203645.D62163@dragon.nuxi.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David O'Brien had the audacity to say:
> Yes, but I have yet to have *anyone* post any numbers that show that
> using `pgcc' made their system "faster".
> 

Some other guy just put up a link to his page showing performance gain of about
25% using gcc-2.95 vs gcc-2.7. 

> I have heard from people that `pgcc' made this system less stable.
> `pgcc' is an experimental testing grounds for new IA-32 optimizations.
> This implies the code it produces may not be the most robust.  Me, I'll
> only use a world and kernel built by a released version of GCC.
> 

The only thing I was pointing out was that the sources were not fully compatible
with gcc-2.95. I understand that, and was simply following up to another post
here.
> 
> > there is also a port in /usr/ports/lang/pgcc.
>                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Like no kidding.  Who do you think made that port and maintains it??
> Geez.
> 


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000110234640.A98425>