Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 18:31:51 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/gnu/usr.bin/cc/cc1 Makefile src/gnu/usr.bin/cc/cc1obj Makefile src/gnu/usr.bin/cc/cc1plus Makefile Message-ID: <20020408180314.Y6180-100000@gamplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <20020408004154.A66483@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, David O'Brien wrote: > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 05:04:01PM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote: > > However, in the special case of the large first passes of > > cc, we (people who set NOSHARED here previously) think that clobbering > > earlier settings is right, because the space savings are small and the > > time savings are large for using NOSHARED unconditionally. > > My reason for a static cc/cpp0/cc1 has nothing to do with speed, but > rather to allow one to recover from a bad libc.so or ld-elf.so.1. Your change from NOSHARED=yes to NOSHARED?=yes had a negative effect on this. NOSHARED=yes is a speed optimization for the global setting of NOSHARED=no. It happens to give the negative optimization for foot- shooting that you want (but this doesn't help much when /bin/sh is optimized for foot-shooting). Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020408180314.Y6180-100000>