Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 03 Feb 2006 19:40:42 -0700
From:      Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>
To:        Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
Cc:        stable@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, harti@freebsd.org, kris@obsecurity.org, sparc64@freebsd.org, des@des.no
Subject:   Re: [releng_6 tinderbox] failure on sparc64/sparc64
Message-ID:  <43E4142A.4@samsco.org>
In-Reply-To: <20060203.105305.71186162.imp@bsdimp.com>
References:  <8664nwrbp8.fsf@xps.des.no>	<20060203102659.GA66445@xor.obsecurity.org>	<861wykr9vx.fsf@xps.des.no> <20060203.105305.71186162.imp@bsdimp.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Warner Losh wrote:
> From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling Smørgrav)
> Subject: Re: [releng_6 tinderbox] failure on sparc64/sparc64
> Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 11:53:38 +0100
> 
> 
>>Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> writes:
>>
>>>COPTFLAGS=-O -pipe according to the tinderbox logs.
>>
>>Hmm, yes, apparently it only uses -O2 on HEAD.
> 
> 
> Can we not have special flags for tinderbox builds?  It make
> pre-commit testing a big pita.  How about just -O on both head and in
> RELENG_6?  The kernel make files have special magic to disable the
> parts of -O2 that are known to be bad because tinderbox uses -O2,
> despite efforts in the past to stop the practice.
> 
> Warner
> 
> 

There is value in testing -O2, since enabling that is a good long-term
goal.  What might be nice is to run tinderboxes with all default
compiler settings, and then once or twice a week to a special run that
has the more experimental flags.

Scott




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43E4142A.4>