From owner-freebsd-current Tue Feb 11 18:17: 5 2003 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 3BCC737B401 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2003 18:17:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from seed.net.tw (sn13.seed.net.tw [139.175.54.13]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ABDA43FBD for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2003 18:17:02 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from leafy@leafy.idv.tw) Received: from [211.74.135.130] (port=49179 helo=leafy.idv.tw) by seed.net.tw with esmtp (Seednet 4.10:4) id 18imSL-000L0N-00 for freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG; Wed, 12 Feb 2003 10:17:02 +0800 Received: from leafy.idv.tw (nobody@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by leafy.idv.tw (8.12.7/8.12.7) with ESMTP id h1C2H1Rm081000 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2003 10:17:01 +0800 (CST) (envelope-from leafy@leafy.idv.tw) Received: (from leafy@localhost) by leafy.idv.tw (8.12.7/8.12.7/Submit) id h1C2H0HB080866 for freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG; Wed, 12 Feb 2003 10:17:00 +0800 (CST) Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 10:17:00 +0800 From: leafy To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: GCC 3.2.2 import -- questions Message-ID: <20030212021700.GA71437@leafy.idv.tw> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20030210204245.E86987@volatile.chemikals.org> <20030211021458.GA18597@leafy.idv.tw> <20030211221139.GA8670@hellraiser.andersa.net> <20030212013800.GA68983@leafy.idv.tw> <20030211210240.M91727@volatile.chemikals.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=big5 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030211210240.M91727@volatile.chemikals.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, Feb 11, 2003 at 09:03:28PM -0500, Wesley Morgan wrote: > > The funny thing is that. If you use a non-P4 optmized GCC to compile lcms with P4 opt, then it passes the test. But with a P4 opted GCC, it borks. Looks like P4 opted GCC itself is bogus. > > That's odd. Does the FreeBSD build skill the stage2 compiler "rebuild"? I > thought the gcc build process tested itself against itself. > Perhaps it missed some floating point test? which could be utilized by lcms. Jiawei Ye -- "Without the userland, the kernel is useless." --inspired by The Tao of Programming To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message