Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2001 01:00:24 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: "Hartmann, O." <ohartman@klima.physik.uni-mainz.de> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ARCH flag in new make.conf Message-ID: <20010307010024.A98154@mollari.cthul.hu> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.33.0103070915530.17134-100000@klima.physik.uni-mainz.de>; from ohartman@klima.physik.uni-mainz.de on Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 09:30:33AM %2B0100 References: <Pine.BSF.4.33.0103070915530.17134-100000@klima.physik.uni-mainz.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--wac7ysb48OaltWcw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 09:30:33AM +0100, Hartmann, O. wrote: > Dear Sirs. >=20 > I'm really confused and surprised by the fact, that with the upcoming new > FreeBSD 4.3 in its make.conf we can choose architectural parameters for t= he > CPU architecture. And I will tell you why. >=20 > Due the last two weeks, that was in fact in the time of FreebSD 4.2, but > I think it doesn't matter, I compiled on three SMP system ( one 2x PII 35= 0MHz, > one 2x PIII 600MHz KATMAI, one 2x PIII 866MHz Coppermine) the whole stuff > with the compiler option -march=3Di686 on both the kernel compilation opt= ion > field and the system code optimization field. The result was a completely > malfunctional NIS/YP system! I thank Mr. Jan Conrad from University of Bo= nn > who spent more than three hours with me on telephon to checkout what's go= ing > wrong on FreeBSD because he used a functional NIS/YP installation - and a= t mine > the cheapest, simplest configuration would work. I do not know exactly wh= ich > compiler switches the new flag targets, either this for the source code o= r that > for the kernel and I do not know which compiler option, either for kernel= or the system, > killed the NIS/YP functionality. Fact is - after removing on both optimiz= ation > fields NIS/YP works well! I've been running NIS on FreeBSD with world and kernel compiled with -march=3Dpentiumpro for about 9 months with no ill effects. In fact I've never heard of reports of bad code generation using the -march settings -- it appears to be very stable. Are you sure you didn't have a nonstandard optimization setting (-O2, etc) as well? Kris --wac7ysb48OaltWcw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE6pfioWry0BWjoQKURAu1tAKCnnPTt7PkB/W6ai5EiBR/T8rpKlgCfb+1L 3bpxU2Sc0XOrJMh9p1QgFfQ= =zL+K -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --wac7ysb48OaltWcw-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010307010024.A98154>