From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu Mar 14 10:44:14 2002
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from dragon.nuxi.com (trang.nuxi.com [66.92.13.169])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 246F337B419
	for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 10:44:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dragon.nuxi.com (obrien@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by dragon.nuxi.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g2EIhelv068077;
	Thu, 14 Mar 2002 10:43:40 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from obrien@dragon.nuxi.com)
Received: (from obrien@localhost)
	by dragon.nuxi.com (8.12.2/8.12.2/Submit) id g2EIgPV4068044;
	Thu, 14 Mar 2002 10:42:25 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 10:42:25 -0800
From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG>
To: Alexander Kabaev <ak03@gte.com>
Cc: jstocker@tzi.de, mb@imp.ch, tlambert2@mindspring.com,
	imp@village.org, edhall@weirdnoise.com, kris@obsecurity.org,
	current@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG,
	edhall@screech.weirdnoise.com
Subject: Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT
Message-ID: <20020314104225.B67703@dragon.nuxi.com>
Reply-To: obrien@FreeBSD.ORG
References: <20020314112547.55cc5786.ak03@gte.com> <000601c1cb7e$b82c18a0$fe02010a@twoflower.liebende.de> <20020314132051.7f17a55b.ak03@gte.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <20020314132051.7f17a55b.ak03@gte.com>; from ak03@gte.com on Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 01:20:51PM -0500
X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT
Organization: The NUXI BSD group
X-Pgp-Rsa-Fingerprint: B7 4D 3E E9 11 39 5F A3  90 76 5D 69 58 D9 98 7A
X-Pgp-Rsa-Keyid: 1024/34F9F9D5
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-hackers.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-hackers>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-hackers>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 01:20:51PM -0500, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> >    b) other options were set at compile time
> >       --> Why dont change to the same in the port?
> >           Leads it to a broken world?
> >           If the only difference is the lost of binary compatibility,
> >           i would say, ok... do it now and we'll need to compile
> >           or ports...
> Pretty much each and every C++ binary and shared library will have to be
> recompiled. Massive binary compatibility breakage is not an option for
> -STABLE, one can hope.

No it is not an option for -STABLE.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message