From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Apr 27 17:36: 0 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.rwwa.com (ns1.rwwa.com [66.92.67.110]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D80337B422 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 17:35:58 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from witr@rwwa.com) Received: from rwwa.com (harvey.rwwa.com [192.124.97.11]) by ns1.rwwa.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA11427; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 20:35:55 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from witr@rwwa.com) Message-Id: <200104280035.UAA11427@ns1.rwwa.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.3.1 01/18/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Alfred Perlstein Cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Trouble with 4.3-RELEASE compiler In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 27 Apr 2001 15:57:25 PDT." <20010427155725.L18676@fw.wintelcom.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 20:38:30 -0400 From: User Witr Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG bright@wintelcom.net said: :-As far as I know FreeBSD doesn't support nor recommened compiling :-things (especially large mission critical programs) with anything :-higher than -O. Out of curiosity, how much potential performance is FreeBSD throwing away by banning -O2 and -O3? To my naive eyes it would seem better to light that candle (try fix the -O2 bug) than curse the darkness. Assuming there is significant performance gain and there truly is only one major -O2 bug. -O2 used to be considered "safe" didn't it? --------------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Withrow, R.W. Withrow Associates, Swampscott MA, witr@rwwa.COM To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message