Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 22:28:36 -0500 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: Craig Rodrigues <rodrigc@attbi.com>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: GCC 3.2.2 import -- questions Message-ID: <p05200f0cba6e1ad3493a@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <20030211024337.GA37587@attbi.com> References: <20030210204245.E86987@volatile.chemikals.org> <20030211020303.GA37644@attbi.com> <20030210200619.A23718@FreeBSD.org> <20030211024337.GA37587@attbi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 9:43 PM -0500 2/10/03, Craig Rodrigues wrote: >There is a long thread on the GCC mailing list right now >complaining about compile-time speed regressions from 2.95.x, >with many complaints coming from Apple: > >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-02/msg00558.html > >Whether these complaints lead to actual improvements is yet >to be seen.... I do not follow that mailing list. Looking at the thread you pointed at, I see comments from Apple, openbsd developers, and someone in the linux world. Could someone who is regularly on that mailing list add a comment about the freebsd project's experience with switching from 2.95.x to 3.x? I'm the type of person who decided I had to buy a new machine after gcc 3.x went in, because I couldn't stand the slowdown of the new compiler. To me, the cost of that was $1500 and a fair amount of my spare time to shuffle machines around. Sounds like a good reason to complain, but I wouldn't want to jump into the gcc mailing list if someone from FreeBSD is already covering compile-time performance. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p05200f0cba6e1ad3493a>