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: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Alexander Kabaev
> Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 5:26 PM
> To: Martin Blapp
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
