Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2002 05:57:05 -0700 (PDT) From: magudexter <magudexter@yahoo.com> To: Gary Jennejohn <garyj@jennejohn.org> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: k6 or i686 optimization on AMD Athlon? Message-ID: <20020902125705.39456.qmail@web20310.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <200209021227.g82CR00O088297@peedub.jennejohn.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I will probably use the i686 as you suggested. I wanted to know if the k6 support has more/better features than the i686 - I guess not. Btw do you know anything about the non exec feature on the i386 in FreeBSD - meaning that the stack no longer executes code; this is a great increase in security as it is the usual method for buffer overflows? Or do you know where to ask/look for it? Thanks for the advices! --- Gary Jennejohn <garyj@jennejohn.org> wrote: > magudexter writes: > > Okay, but when will the gcc3.21 make it into the > > stable release? > > Dunno, but you can always install the port. > Considering that 4.7 > is due out soon I don't think the release > engineering team is > going to import a new gcc. There was enough > controversy among > the -current crowd when gcc-3.2 was imported. > > > And until then, for the gcc-2.95.3 > > (the one found in the stable version) what setting > you > > know works better: > > i686 or k6? > > > > I used i686. The Athlon is more an i688 than an > i586. > > --- > Gary Jennejohn / garyj@jennejohn.org gj@freebsd.org > gj@denx.de > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020902125705.39456.qmail>