From owner-freebsd-ports  Wed Jan 17 04:21:53 1996
Return-Path: owner-ports
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id EAA08371
          for ports-outgoing; Wed, 17 Jan 1996 04:21:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU [136.152.64.181])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id EAA08365
          Wed, 17 Jan 1996 04:21:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (8.7.3/8.6.9) id EAA02193; Wed, 17 Jan 1996 04:21:42 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 1996 04:21:42 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199601171221.EAA02193@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>
To: jmacd@freebsd.org
CC: ports@freebsd.org
Subject: mit-scheme compiles with -O6
From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

I know that's what the original source said, but do we really want to
do this?  I've heard that beyond -O2, higher optimization levels will
just introduce more bugs for negligible (or sometimes negative) speed
improvement.

If you agree to drep this to -O or -O2, I will change it (there is a
hunk in the patch that already contains the "-O6" part :).

Satoshi