tag 429385 + moreinfo thanks please recheck with gcc-4.2/gcc-snapshot from unstable
David Baron writes: > On Monday 18 June 2007, Falk Hueffner wrote: > > David Baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Package author posts: > > >> Better compile using G++-4.0. 4.1 fails with an internal compiler > > >> error compiling ToneStack.cc. I filed a bug for the debian G++-4.1 > > >> as instructed. G++-4.0 compiles fine. > > > > > > Just edit the makefile and swap "-O3" with "-O2" in the OPTS > > > section. The FSF doesnt seem to be kidding when they say -O2 is the > > > only tested optimisation level for GCC. > > > > This is bullshit. The FSF does not say anything about things like > > this, because they are not directly involved in gcc development. > > > > > Released software should be compiled with "-O2" IMHO. > > > > This is true, though, since the Debian policy mandates it, unless > > there's a good reason not to (e.g., it has been found to give a > > significant performance advantage to use -O3). > > Would love to. Someone playing with same compile tried -o6! > However, as I posted, -o3 would compile with G++4.0 but not with G++4.1, thus > this bug. > > (Meanwhile, am I better off with the -o3 4.0 compile or with the -o2 4.1 > compile? ) > > BTW, others reported various but related problems with 64-bit compiles. > Reported on Linux Audio User's List [EMAIL PROTECTED] I > would assume their site has an archive where the whole thread could be > viewed. I will forward this response to this list as well. > > > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
