Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2006 15:28:15 -0500 From: Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org> To: kmacy@fsmware.com Cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org, harti@FreeBSD.org, sparc64@FreeBSD.org, stable@FreeBSD.org, kris@obsecurity.org, imp@bsdimp.com Subject: Re: [releng_6 tinderbox] failure on sparc64/sparc64 Message-ID: <20060204152815.15ee487a.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <b1fa29170602040848p15a21fdibeecbd9ea8d34044@mail.gmail.com> References: <861wykr9vx.fsf@xps.des.no> <20060203.105305.71186162.imp@bsdimp.com> <86bqxntixy.fsf@xps.des.no> <20060204.085134.44793895.imp@bsdimp.com> <b1fa29170602040848p15a21fdibeecbd9ea8d34044@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 4 Feb 2006 08:48:28 -0800 Kip Macy <kip.macy@gmail.com> wrote: > IIRC, at NetApp -O2 was the default for all builds. I think it is safe to > say that the generated code is quite stable. If -O2 allows the compiler to > catch errors earlier it should be the default. > I concur. -- Tom Rhodes
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060204152815.15ee487a.trhodes>