From owner-freebsd-current  Sat Nov 13 23:51: 1 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from peach.ocn.ne.jp (peach.ocn.ne.jp [210.145.254.87])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id CBC811526D; Sat, 13 Nov 1999 23:50:54 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from dcs@newsguy.com)
Received: from newsguy.com (p13-dn03kiryunisiki.gunma.ocn.ne.jp [210.232.224.142])
	by peach.ocn.ne.jp (8.9.1a/OCN) with ESMTP id QAA08142;
	Sun, 14 Nov 1999 16:50:51 +0900 (JST)
Message-ID: <382E6951.DCD1973C@newsguy.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 16:48:33 +0900
From: "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en,pt-BR,ja
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: obrien@FreeBSD.ORG
Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: A call to squease more bytes from `boot2'
References: <19991113152838.A16659@dragon.nuxi.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

David O'Brien wrote:
> 
> Once again, `boot2' is the only thing holding us back from upgrading our
> base compiler.  The commit below plus -fdata-sections gets us to needing
> to reduce another 100 bytes from `boot2'.
> 
> This is an appeal to hackers to squeeze another 100 bytes out.  It would
> be preferable to use the ``egcs'' port as the compiler, but I presume
> using the current system compiler would be OK too.

I'd rather find out _why_ the new compiler generates a bigger
object.

--
Daniel C. Sobral			(8-DCS)
dcs@newsguy.com
dcs@freebsd.org

	What y'all wanna do?
	Wanna be hackers? Code crackers? Slackers
	Wastin' time with all the chatroom yakkers?


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