Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 11:36:18 -0400 From: Jon Door <jondoor@udor.net> To: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: Ports are not ready for CFLAGS=-O2 in 6.0 Message-ID: <42C805F2.4060103@udor.net> In-Reply-To: <20050703055842.GA1933@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20041102222000.GA65845@xor.obsecurity.org> <42C76DF0.8070307@magnesium.net> <20050703055842.GA1933@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kris Kennaway wrote: >On Sat, Jul 02, 2005 at 09:47:44PM -0700, Adam Weinberger wrote: > > >>Kris Kennaway wrote: >> >> >>>About a week ago des changed the default value of CFLAGS to "-O2 >>>-pipe" on FreeBSD 6.0-CURRENT. While this is believed to be safe for >>>compiling world + kernel on -CURRENT thesedays (because the aliasing >>>bugs that are exposed with -O2 have been fixed), it's definitely *not* >>>safe for compiling many ports (there are at least 350 ports that emit >>>warnings about aliasing, and would probably have runtime errors when >>>compiled with -O2; moreover, a number of ports fail to even build with >>>-O2). >>> >>>Therefore, if you compile ports on FreeBSD 6.0, you should set >>>CFLAGS=-O -pipe in your /etc/make.conf for now, until we can resolve >>>this problem more satisfactorily. >>> >>>Kris >>> >>> >>This is just an FYI for whomever cares: all GNOME metaports build >>cleanly in a -CURRENT jail with -O2. >> >> > >This was a mail from last year, but thanks anyway :) > >Kris > >P.S. The problem is only if you build without -fno-strict-alias, which >is the default now. > > Does it make sense to introduce a CFLAGS_PORTS option? Basically an override used when compiling ports as opposed to world?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42C805F2.4060103>