From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu Mar 14  9:45:38 2002
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mailout11.sul.t-online.com (mailout11.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.85])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id BA4AD37B405; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 09:45:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fwd08.sul.t-online.de 
	by mailout11.sul.t-online.com with smtp 
	id 16lZAP-0001Lh-00; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 18:37:29 +0100
Received: from twoflower (320072111332-0001@[217.80.121.93]) by fmrl08.sul.t-online.com
	with smtp id 16lZAF-0sVo7UC; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 18:37:19 +0100
Reply-To: <jstocker@tzi.de>
From: "Jan Stocker" <jstocker@tzi.de>
To: "Alexander Kabaev" <ak03@gte.com>, "Martin Blapp" <mb@imp.ch>
Cc: <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, <imp@village.org>,
	<edhall@weirdnoise.com>, <kris@obsecurity.org>,
	<current@FreeBSD.ORG>, <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>, <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG>,
	<edhall@screech.weirdnoise.com>
Subject: RE: gcc -O broken in CURRENT
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 18:36:05 +0100
Message-ID: <000601c1cb7e$b82c18a0$fe02010a@twoflower.liebende.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
In-Reply-To: <20020314112547.55cc5786.ak03@gte.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
Importance: Normal
X-Sender: 320072111332-0001@t-dialin.net
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-hackers.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-hackers>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-hackers>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

So now i am a little bit confused... State of the art:

1) Bug is in -stable and -current
   --> This means possible patches only in -current arent responsible for
       this behaviour
2) Bug is in os delivered gcc but not in port gcc.
   a) port has more or less patches / os gcc has been modified
      --> Didn't someone told they are the same?
   b) other options were set at compile time
      --> Why dont change to the same in the port?
          Leads it to a broken world?
          If the only difference is the lost of binary compatibility,
          i would say, ok... do it now and we'll need to compile
          or ports...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
> [mailto:owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Alexander Kabaev
> Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 5:26 PM
> To: Martin Blapp
> Cc: tlambert2@mindspring.com; imp@village.org; edhall@weirdnoise.com;
> kris@obsecurity.org; jstocker@tzi.de; current@FreeBSD.ORG;
> hackers@FreeBSD.ORG; obrien@FreeBSD.ORG; edhall@screech.weirdnoise.com
> Subject: Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT
> 
> 
> > Do you have a patch for this ?
>   I do not fully understand the parts of GCC involved, so I need some
> time to verify my initial diagnosis and to create a patch.  In other
> words - not yet :) 
> 
> --
> Alexander Kabaev
> 
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
> 

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message