From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Apr 25 15:26:48 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAEA616A4CE
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 15:26:48 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from voodoo.oberon.net (voodoo.oberon.net [212.118.165.100])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78C8943D66
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 15:26:48 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from krion@voodoo.oberon.net)
Received: from krion by voodoo.oberon.net with local (Exim 4.50 (FreeBSD))
	id 1DQ5U0-0006rJ-Bi; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 17:26:48 +0200
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 17:26:48 +0200
From: Kirill Ponomarew <krion@voodoo.oberon.net>
To: Danny Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il>
Message-ID: <20050425152648.GB25681@voodoo.oberon.net>
References: <E1DQ5MS-000FUi-51@cs1.cs.huji.ac.il>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <E1DQ5MS-000FUi-51@cs1.cs.huji.ac.il>
X-NCC-Regid: de.oberon
X-NIC-HDL: KP869-RIPE
cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: FreeBSD 6 is coming too fast
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 15:26:48 -0000

On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 06:19:00PM +0300, Danny Braniss wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 08:44:34AM -0600, Scott Long wrote:
> > > >No, I'm not going to do it because of lack of knowledge, there are
> > > >people who have more experience with it than me.
> > > >
> > > Well, as I said in another email, switching to GCC 4 just because of
> > > dubious "25% faster" (faster at what?  compiling?  resulting generated
> > > code?  crashing?) claims in the changelog is not a terribly good
> > > reason =-)
> > 
> > 25% faster to compile the code, not running it.
> 
> so that closes the argument! i can do a makeworld in about 25 minutes, cutting
> it down by 6 minutes will not make any real difference, but it will take
> much longer to recode all the 'usupported features'. if you have an
> application that takes hours to compile, then please, go ahead and use GCC 4.

Do not forget about pointyhat which compiles a tons of ports.  Switching
it to gcc-4.0 would decrease builds time, and it's not a bad idea IMHO.

But since I'm not going to handle it, I better shut up and let
another people take decision.

-Kirill