Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2006 23:13:57 +0200 From: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org> To: Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav <des@des.no> Cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org, harti@FreeBSD.org, sparc64@FreeBSD.org, stable@FreeBSD.org, kris@obsecurity.org Subject: Re: [releng_6 tinderbox] failure on sparc64/sparc64 Message-ID: <20060204211357.GD7604@ip.net.ua> In-Reply-To: <86irruao3i.fsf@xps.des.no> References: <861wykr9vx.fsf@xps.des.no> <20060203.105305.71186162.imp@bsdimp.com> <86bqxntixy.fsf@xps.des.no> <20060204.085134.44793895.imp@bsdimp.com> <86irruao3i.fsf@xps.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--FFoLq8A0u+X9iRU8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Feb 04, 2006 at 09:03:13PM +0100, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote: > "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> writes: > > Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav <des@des.no> writes: > > > As I have repeatedly pointed out in the past, -O2 catches more > > > bugs because it enables optimizations which require more extensive > > > coverage analysis. > > Then it should be the default, standard flag. >=20 > I wish. Unfortunately, there is a very vocal minority which > systematically opposes this kind of change. >=20 What breakage do you mean if tinderboxes are run without it and usually compile successfully? :-) I mean, I don't see a reason not to remove -fno-strict-aliasing =66rom the kernel builds now. Perhaps it's still needed for some platforms that aren't covered by tinderbox, not sure... Can be easily checked with "make universe". Cheers, --=20 Ruslan Ermilov ru@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer --FFoLq8A0u+X9iRU8 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFD5RkVqRfpzJluFF4RAklIAJ0QEzi5JZ0aMyURweB0fqXGYOxlewCfUAbp /mt4rOFebq7i3OSK+OjWhyo= =fTUH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --FFoLq8A0u+X9iRU8--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060204211357.GD7604>