Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 08:26:34 +0100 From: Wilko Bulte <wkb@freebie.xs4all.nl> To: Rob B <rbyrnes@ozemail.com.au> Cc: Riccardo.Veraldi@fi.infn.it, freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: building stable with mcpu=ev56 option Message-ID: <20011211082634.C68488@freebie.xs4all.nl> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20011211111801.0372c910@pop.ozemail.com.au>; from rbyrnes@ozemail.com.au on Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 11:18:59AM %2B1100 References: <Pine.NEB.4.33.0112100847510.28454-100000@dijkstra.fi.infn. it> <5.1.0.14.2.20011211111801.0372c910@pop.ozemail.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 11:18:59AM +1100, Rob B wrote: > At 18:48 10/12/2001, Riccardo.Veraldi@fi.infn.it sent this up the stick: > > >Hello, > >is it a good or bad thing to build stable with specific CPU options ?? > >I noticed I have some strange trouble with system programs built adding > >mcpu=ev56 in make.conf > > I use that exact option, and notice nothing out of the ordinary. The only > copmiler setting that make lots of noise is using the -O2 or higher setting Make that: results in buggy binaries. Don't use O2 on Alpha -- | / o / /_ _ email: wilko@FreeBSD.org |/|/ / / /( (_) Bulte Arnhem, The Netherlands To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011211082634.C68488>