Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 17:34:21 +0300 From: Dmitry Alyabyev <dimitry@al.org.ua> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is use of -O2 still deprecated for buildworld in -stable? Message-ID: <ai3jpd$fih$1@news.kiev.sovam.com> References: <20020727191945.A10231@lava.net> <3D4388BD.EB384247@pantherdragon.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Darren Pilgrim wrote: > Clifton Royston wrote: >> >> I had a vigorous discussion about this with a colleague on Friday >> (yesterday.) We're trying to agree on the proper set of options to use >> in /etc/make.conf for doing "buildworld" and/or "buildkernel" i386 >> servers (Pentium 3.) > > -O -pipe is the recommended for CFLAGS and COPTFLAGS. > >> These machines will be running production services for our customers, >> so they need to be high-reliability; we're running 4.5-release and >> 4.6-release CVSuped to those tags, not trying to track -stable. >> >> My colleague is insistent that because -O2 in gcc will generally >> produce much better code, we should be using it if it's at all possible >> and safe. > > According to everything I've read, the difference between -O and -O2 > is neglible in FreeBSD, at the cost of significantly higher compilation > times. Also, the more the compiler does to the code, the more likely > you'll get unexpected behaviour. If you want stability, then go with > -O. following your discussion - that is the highest reasonable value for optimization ? I mean applications, not kernel ... many packages recomend -O6 or like that -- Dimitry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ai3jpd$fih$1>