From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jan 16 03:28:57 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 DDD6716A4CE
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 03:28:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from salmon.maths.tcd.ie (salmon.maths.tcd.ie [134.226.81.11])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8DFAD43D2D
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 03:28:54 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie)
Received: from walton.maths.tcd.ie by salmon.maths.tcd.ie with SMTP
          id <aa01177@salmon>; 16 Jan 2004 11:28:53 +0000 (GMT)
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 11:28:53 +0000
From: David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie>
To: current@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <20040116112853.GA48549@walton.maths.tcd.ie>
References: <2198.148.121.98.106.1074170436.squirrel@mail.carebears.mine.nu>
	<xzpy8s9fca5.fsf@dwp.des.no> <20040116095217.GG59417@starjuice.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20040116095217.GG59417@starjuice.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i
Sender: dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie
Subject: Re: compiling world with optimization
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 11:28:58 -0000

On Fri, Jan 16, 2004 at 11:52:17AM +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> It's true that most of us don't care.  However, I remember some folks
> (kan and obrien?) saying that they have an interest in seeing these
> fixed in the gcc distribution.

In this case, it's may be a bit of pam code that doesn't adhere
strictly to the C standard, so the gcc people are unlikely to
be interested.

	David.