Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 22:09:49 -0500 From: Richard Coleman <richardcoleman@mindspring.com> To: Paul Seniura <pdseniura@techie.com> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: need help on CFLAGS in /etc/make.conf please Message-ID: <402D917D.30009@mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <20040213170347.DC19E5C3B@techpc04.okladot.state.ok.us> References: <20040213001703.616C75C3B@techpc04.okladot.state.ok.us><20040213011324.GA55948@xor.obsecurity.org><20040213035608.3AA11A38EA@scifi.homeip.net><20040213040929.GA58196@xor.obsecurity.org> <20040213170347.DC19E5C3B@techpc04.okladot.state.ok.us>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Paul Seniura wrote: > Chapter 2 of "FreeBSD Developers' Handbook": > > | 2.4 Compiling with cc > | > | -O > | Create an optimized version of the executable. The compiler > | performs various clever tricks to try and produce an executable > | that runs faster than normal. You can add a number after the -O > | to specify a higher level of optimization, but this often exposes > | bugs in the compiler's optimizer. For instance, the version of cc > | that comes with the 2.1.0 release of FreeBSD is known to produce > | bad code with the -O2 option in some circumstances. > | > | Optimization is usually only turned on when compiling a release > | version. > |[...] > > HUH?!? "the version of cc that comes with 2.1.0" has those -O bugs???? > Good grief, we're running 5.x (-Current, actually)! > I can't find any mention of any such bugs with GCC 3.x on i386. Unless there is evidence of more recent gcc bugs, that part of the handbook should really be removed. I can easily imagine the reaction on this list if the reverse were true, and the gcc handbook was knocking FreeBSD for a bug in release 3.0 (or whatever). Richard Coleman richardcoleman@mindspring.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?402D917D.30009>