From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sat Feb  3 12:42:39 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id MAA28198
          for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 3 Feb 1996 12:42:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rover.village.org (rover.village.org [204.144.255.49])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA28192
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Sat, 3 Feb 1996 12:42:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rover.village.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) with SMTP id NAA12992; Sat, 3 Feb 1996 13:42:14 -0700
Message-Id: <199602032042.NAA12992@rover.village.org>
To: Andreas Klemm <andreas@knobel.gun.de>
Subject: Re: Another Pentium gcc patch, -D__FreeBSD__=2 -Dbsd4_4 
Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org
In-reply-to: Your message of Sat, 03 Feb 1996 14:02:52 +0100
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 1996 13:42:14 -0700
From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

: Ok, maybe one should remove __386BSD__ and not include bsd4_4....
: but add -D__FreeBSD__=2
: 
: Would that be okay ? May I say that officially to the pgcc
: developers ?!

That would make it consistant with the GCC as shipped by FSF and as
shipped by FreeBSD in 2.0R (and 2.1R).  I think that to be a good
thing.

Warner