From owner-freebsd-ports Fri Apr 27 15:57:37 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 945C937B422; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 15:57:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bright@fw.wintelcom.net) Received: (from bright@localhost) by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id f3RMvPg11372; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 15:57:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 15:57:25 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Joao Carlos Mendes Luis Cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Trouble with 4.3-RELEASE compiler Message-ID: <20010427155725.L18676@fw.wintelcom.net> References: <20010427194022.A18639@roma.coe.ufrj.br> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20010427194022.A18639@roma.coe.ufrj.br>; from jonny@jonny.eng.br on Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 07:40:22PM -0300 X-all-your-base: are belong to us. Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org please don't cc both hackers and stable lists. * Joao Carlos Mendes Luis [010427 15:41] wrote: > Hi, > > I was installing a squid server with 4.3-RELEASE, and found that > FreeBSD has now a bug in the compiler that affects squid. The default > compilation of squid is with CFLAGS=-g -O2 -Wall, and this setup > triggers the bug. > > I've left a trimmed down copy of the problem files at > ftp://ftp.jonny.eng.br/hidden/jonny/trouble.tgz, compile it with > gcc -g -O2 -Wall teste.c rfc1035.c, and see the bug happening. Remove > the -O2 or change it for -O, and see it going away. > > Should this be a reason to roll back the compiler to version > 2.95.2, as it was before Tue Apr 10 19:23:19 2001 UTC, when it > changed to 2.95.3? What to do with the upcoming CDs? As far as I know FreeBSD doesn't support nor recommened compiling things (especially large mission critical programs) with anything higher than -O. The reason I'm cc'ing -ports is because I notice an inordinate amount of ports that compile C and C++ things using crazy optimizations like -O3 or -O2 along with sometimes silly things like -m486. Is there a guidline to encourage turning down optimization to something safer for our ported applications? -- -Alfred Perlstein - [alfred@freebsd.org] http://www.egr.unlv.edu/~slumos/on-netbsd.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message