Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 15:48:21 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Kirk Strauser <kirk@strauser.com> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: Ports are not ready for CFLAGS=-O2 in 6.0 Message-ID: <20041102234821.GA76782@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <200411021736.21034.kirk@strauser.com> References: <20041102222000.GA65845@xor.obsecurity.org> <200411021736.21034.kirk@strauser.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--sdtB3X0nJg68CQEu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 05:36:17PM -0600, Kirk Strauser wrote: > On Tuesday 02 November 2004 16:20, Kris Kennaway wrote: >=20 > > (there are at least 350 ports that emit warnings about aliasing, and wo= uld > > probably have runtime errors when compiled with -O2; moreover, a number= of > > ports fail to even build with -O2). =20 >=20 > Out of curiosity, are those ports like to have equivalents in Gentoo's=20 > "portage" system? Those guys love to build with -O310 -fomit-instruction= s=20 > but their stuff seems to pretty much work. Why do we seem to have so man= y=20 > problems with (presumably?) the same software on our system? Don't know, perhaps they don't care about the fraction of ports that don't work properly since the rest of them have such eleet optimization. Kris --sdtB3X0nJg68CQEu Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFBiBzFWry0BWjoQKURAvDzAJwKu0s1Tm/SvSTCQKIaY2asg2ULpgCgiSiV XjJ3srgV5lJ6ZKIrrnxLunA= =/GTh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --sdtB3X0nJg68CQEu--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041102234821.GA76782>