Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2002 12:32:49 -0400 From: Mike Barcroft <mike@FreeBSD.org> To: Andrew Kolchoogin <andrew@snark.rinet.ru> Cc: David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Comments on Release Building for -current Message-ID: <20020803123249.B70372@espresso.q9media.com> In-Reply-To: <20020802082336.GA12034@snark.rinet.ru>; from andrew@snark.rinet.ru on Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 12:23:36PM %2B0400 References: <20020801173513.GC82778@dragon.nuxi.com> <20020802041414.A3616-100000@gamplex.bde.org> <20020802073955.GA88247@dragon.nuxi.com> <20020802082336.GA12034@snark.rinet.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Andrew Kolchoogin <andrew@snark.rinet.ru> writes: > David, > > On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 12:39:55AM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > > > The rest of the GCC using world can use -O2 on their code. We are the > > only ones that have so much trouble with it. It is probably due to our > > bugs, not GCC's. > sorry, but some time ago I read here that gcc -O2 breaks our printf() in > libc. I haven't find any assembler code in /usr/src/lib/libc/stdio/vfprintf.c, > as such, if some C compiler can't handle VALID and STANDARDS-COMPLIANT C code, > this compiler is broken. Isn't it? > > Indeed, all of FreeBSD users could help to catch such a bug in gcc optimizer > code. :) If someone could find the small segment of code where the optimizer screws up, and write a small program to demonstrate the problem, we would have a good chance of it getting fixed. Best regards, Mike Barcroft To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020803123249.B70372>