Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 20:48:41 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Coleman Kane <cokane@one.net> Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: When does the 4.x branch go stable? Message-ID: <20000110204841.B98651@relay.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20000110234640.A98425@evil.2y.net> References: <20000109214046.7913BA54DB@netcom1.netcom.com> <Pine.A41.4.10.10001091547130.91952-100000@dante24.u.washington.edu> <20000110004054.A1181@evil.2y.net> <20000110094834.D94525@relay.nuxi.com> <20000110153703.A19250@evil.2y.net> <20000110203645.D62163@dragon.nuxi.com> <20000110234640.A98425@evil.2y.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jan 10, 2000 at 11:46:40PM -0500, Coleman Kane wrote: > > Yes, but I have yet to have *anyone* post any numbers that show that > > using `pgcc' made their system "faster". > > Some other guy just put up a link to his page showing performance gain > of about 25% using gcc-2.95 vs gcc-2.7. If you mean the gzip/bzip2 test, yes I will agree for some things it makes sense. HOWEVER, this topic started off as about building the FreeBSD world and kernel with a different compiler. > The only thing I was pointing out was that the sources were not fully > compatible with gcc-2.95. I understand that, and was simply following > up to another post here. Since the 4.0 sources are buildable with Gcc 2.95, it shouldn't take too much time for someone that cared to come up with a patchset to allow 3.4 to be compiled with Gcc 2.95. -- -- David (obrien@NUXI.com) 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?20000110204841.B98651>