From owner-freebsd-stable Tue Jul 25 10:35:40 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from privatecube.privatelabs.com (privatecube.privatelabs.com [198.143.31.30]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FF1537B6DD for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 10:35:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mi@virtual-estates.net) Received: from misha.privatelabs.com (misha.privatelabs.com [198.143.31.6]) by privatecube.privatelabs.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id MAA05558; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 12:34:36 -0400 Received: from virtual-estates.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by misha.privatelabs.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA00748; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:31:06 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mi@virtual-estates.net) Message-Id: <200007251731.NAA00748@misha.privatelabs.com> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:31:03 -0400 (EDT) From: mi@aldan.algebra.com Subject: Re: Recommended compilation optimizations To: Dave Glowacki Cc: stable@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <200007242204.RAA29279@hyde.ssec.wisc.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 24 Jul, Dave Glowacki wrote: = > On 24 Jul, Wilko Bulte wrote: = > = AFAIK the FreeBSD project tries to take gcc & friends as-is as = > = much as possible. = > = > As I've indicated a couple of times, I personally found an = > optimization bug non-reproduceable on Linux (Mandrake). [...] = But is it non-reproduceable? Take a look at the PR I mentioned already: http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=19245 = Were both FreeBSD and Mandrake using the exact same version of gcc? = Did the Mandrake version have any Linux-specific patches applied? At least, gcc -v shows nothing special. It is all in the PR. If Mandrake does apply some fixes, may be, FreeBSD needs to do so too? This is worth investigating, instead of discounting with "don't use optimization". -mi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message