Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 23:30:19 +0000 From: Chris <chrcoluk@gmail.com> To: Matthias Buelow <mkb@incubus.de> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CFLAGS=-O2 -pipe problems in RELENG_5 ? Message-ID: <3aaaa3a0501181530975fecf@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <41ECBED0.8000704@incubus.de> References: <6.2.0.14.0.20050112173437.089758a0@64.7.153.2> <20050113225145.GA781@galgenberg.net> <6.2.0.14.0.20050113193132.042966c8@64.7.153.2> <20050117193844.GB1110@galgenberg.net> <20050117224809.GC31463@xor.obsecurity.org> <6.2.0.14.0.20050117210539.08489c28@64.7.153.2> <41ECBED0.8000704@incubus.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I have been compiling ports using -O2 since I started using FreeBSD back in 2003 and only port that has had issues with this is lang/ezm3 in FreeBSD 5.2.1 it needed -O. Chris On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:46:24 +0100, Matthias Buelow <mkb@incubus.de> wrote: > Mike Tancsa wrote: > > At 05:48 PM 17/01/2005, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > > > Like I said before, switching back to -O makes the system stable once > > again. I let it run continuous buildworlds without issue for 24hrs > > along with burnP6, and memtest running in the background. No problem. > > Then I'd leave it at that. The difference between gcc -O2 and -O is > marginal at best. Think of it as -O being the large axe that chops off > a huge slab, and -O2 being the large axe, followed by some scratching > with a nail-file. Most of the time it isn't worth the effort. > > mkb. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3aaaa3a0501181530975fecf>