From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Aug 7 19:11:05 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hackers@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9A4516A41F for ; Sun, 7 Aug 2005 19:11:05 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from PeterJeremy@optushome.com.au) Received: from mail03.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail03.syd.optusnet.com.au [211.29.132.184]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F32343D46 for ; Sun, 7 Aug 2005 19:11:04 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from PeterJeremy@optushome.com.au) Received: from cirb503493.alcatel.com.au (c220-239-19-236.belrs4.nsw.optusnet.com.au [220.239.19.236]) by mail03.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j77JAg8M010493 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Mon, 8 Aug 2005 05:10:42 +1000 Received: from cirb503493.alcatel.com.au (localhost.alcatel.com.au [127.0.0.1]) by cirb503493.alcatel.com.au (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j77JAfSR009963; Mon, 8 Aug 2005 05:10:41 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from pjeremy@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au) Received: (from pjeremy@localhost) by cirb503493.alcatel.com.au (8.12.10/8.12.9/Submit) id j77JAfGw009962; Mon, 8 Aug 2005 05:10:41 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from pjeremy) Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 05:10:41 +1000 From: Peter Jeremy To: Vasil Dimov Message-ID: <20050807191041.GE7708@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> References: <20050806114935.GB7708@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> <20050807080716.GA40148@sinanica.bg.datamax> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050807080716.GA40148@sinanica.bg.datamax> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Finding an illegal instruction in gnucash/guile X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Aug 2005 19:11:05 -0000 On Sun, 2005-Aug-07 11:07:16 +0300, Vasil Dimov wrote: >On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 09:49:36PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote: >> >... >> scratch with different CPUTYPE and/or CFLAGS? (I'm currently using >> CPUTYPE=athlon-xp and CFLAGS=-O -g). > >Hmmz, CFLAGS=-O -g, what do you expect from this combination? Optimise the code and generate symbolic debugging information. Unlike many other compilers, "-O" and "-g" are not mutually exclusive in gcc. >gcc(1): >Without `-O', the compiler's goal is to reduce the cost of com- >pilation and to make debugging produce the expected results. Without "-O", gcc will compile each statement independently and ensure that any results are assigned to the target variables at the end of each statement. This makes is easy to debug because the program flow will match the source code. "-O" allows the compiler to re-order code, delete dead code, remove variable assignments, etc. The code is still functionally equivalent but is not as easy to debug because of the re-arrangements. This is more suited to production code where you don't intend to perform any debugging but do not want to make it impossible to debug if an unexpected problem occurs. -- Peter Jeremy