From owner-freebsd-current  Wed Oct 11 06:48:29 1995
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id GAA08194
          for current-outgoing; Wed, 11 Oct 1995 06:48:29 -0700
Received: from asstdc.scgt.oz.au (root@asstdc.scgt.oz.au [202.14.234.65])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id GAA08189
          for <current@freebsd.org>; Wed, 11 Oct 1995 06:48:26 -0700
Received: (from imb@localhost)
	by asstdc.scgt.oz.au (8.6.12/BSD-4.4)
	id XAA23413 for current@freebsd.org; Wed, 11 Oct 1995 23:48:19 +1000
From: michael butler <imb@scgt.oz.au>
Message-Id: <199510111348.XAA23413@asstdc.scgt.oz.au>
Subject: -fno-strength-reduce ?
To: current@freebsd.org
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 23:48:18 +1000 (EST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24beta]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 572       
Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

I notice, in the example /etc/make.conf, that the utilities are recommended
to be compiled (if you wish to use optimisations), with the
"no-strength-reduce" directive. OK, I assume something breaks .. but should
everything be compiled with this ? Isn't it enough to add the relevant
CFLAGS to that specific thing which breaks ?

If it is a generic "gcc (2.63) is broken with optimisation" problem,
can/should the kernel be compiled with "-O2 -fno-strength-reduce" or are
there other hidden "gotchas" that break it as well over and above the "-O"
example given ?

	michael