On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 11:33:08AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>I see. It seems the 3.4.x code is just assuming a bit too much when
>examining functions, whereas the 4.x implementation is a bit more careful.
AFAICT, the code was just plain wrong with gcc 3.4.4. However, I found a bug
report w
On Jun 12 11:22, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >I'm wondering if we should do that or not. I'm not a gcc person, so I'm
> >not exactly the right one to make such a decision. It's just interesting
> >that the strict-aliasing problem Chris found, is no problem in gcc 4
> >anymo
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Jun 11 18:53, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Otherwise, do you know by any chance, if there exists some fix for that
problem? The above kludge is almost a year old, so there's a chance
that somebody already found the fix.
Where we had a problem wa
On Jun 11 18:53, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >Otherwise, do you know by any chance, if there exists some fix for that
> >problem? The above kludge is almost a year old, so there's a chance
> >that somebody already found the fix.
>
> Where we had a problem was with -fschedul
On Jun 11 16:37, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 02:33:32PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >I did a little more debugging on this and it seems like, in this case at
> >least, the problem is that the newlib code is wrong. Compiling it with
> >-Wstrict-aliasing revealed a pro
On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 02:33:32PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>I did a little more debugging on this and it seems like, in this case at
>least, the problem is that the newlib code is wrong. Compiling it with
>-Wstrict-aliasing revealed a problem. Correcting the strict aliasing problem
>seem
On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 06:53:14PM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
>Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>Gerrit, could you please follow up on this? It seems the simplest way is
>>to just switch off -funit-at-a-time for the -O2 optimization. This is the
>>patch we applied internally, if that's of any help for
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Gerrit, could you please follow up on this? It seems the simplest way is
to just switch off -funit-at-a-time for the -O2 optimization. This is the
patch we applied internally, if that's of any help for you:
Index: gcc/opts.c
=
On Jun 10 20:57, David Rothenberger wrote:
> rsync has started reported negative statistics with the 20050610
> snapshot and a DLL I built from CVS HEAD today using gcc 3.4.4 and the
> latest gcc-mingw release. Interestingly (to me, at least), it works
> correctly with CVS HEAD built today using
rsync has started reported negative statistics with the 20050610
snapshot and a DLL I built from CVS HEAD today using gcc 3.4.4 and the
latest gcc-mingw release. Interestingly (to me, at least), it works
correctly with CVS HEAD built today using gcc 3.3.3 and the previous
gcc-mingw release.
H
10 matches
Mail list logo
