Matt Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>I think you are being entirely sensible. I used to use -O2 all the time,
>but as of about a year ago it started breaking things (starting with
>the FreeBSD kernel). Then I started using -Os because I like the code
>compaction it produced,
On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 03:05:44PM -0600, Jeffrey J. Mountin wrote:
> Will be curious to see using -O2 for world and kernel builds will break
> with the new flags. Matt may have given up on it, but it has been working
> (again) for months now. Keep expecting it to break, which these changes
At 02:31 PM 3/7/01 -0500, Russell D. Murphy Jr. wrote:
>Another datapoint. . .
>
>I changed make.conf on, I believe, Dec. 6:
>
># CFLAGS= -O -pipe
>CFLAGS= -O -pipe -mcpu=pentiumpro -march=pentiumpro
>
>(There's also:
>
>COPTFLAGS= -O -pipe)
>
>(I gather that -mcpu is redundant.) I r
On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 12:28:29PM +0100, Claude Buisson wrote:
> given that the optimization MUST be activated by a CPUTYPE=XXX in
> the user's /etc/make.conf, what is the use of NO_CPU_FLAGS ?
> just needing 2 lines instead of 0 in /etc/make.conf ?
Because you may want OpenSSL ASM optimizatio
I think the point is that you can be no more certain that
Mr. Hartman's problems were *not* caused by setting the -march flag to
i686 than I can be absolutely certain that they were. Given no better
than 50/50 certainty, however, the warning appeared prudent given that
we're unlikely to know with
On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 01:34:39AM -0800, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
> From: "Hartmann, O." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: ARCH flag in new make.conf
> Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2001 09:30:33 +0100 (CET)
>
> > I'm really confused and surprised by the fact, that with
From: "Hartmann, O." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ARCH flag in new make.conf
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2001 09:30:33 +0100 (CET)
> I'm really confused and surprised by the fact, that with the upcoming new
> FreeBSD 4.3 in its make.conf we can choose architectural parameters
On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 10:23:06AM +0100, Hartmann, O. wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>
> Is this also true for SMP systems?
SMP systems use C code like non-SMP systems; I wouldn't expect -march
to generically make a difference there (i.e. it should be no different
than non-SM
On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote:
Is this also true for SMP systems?
:>On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 09:09:36AM +, Antony T Curtis wrote:
:>> Kris Kennaway wrote:
:>> >
:>> > On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 09:30:33AM +0100, Hartmann, O. wrote:
:>> > > Dear Sirs.
:>> > >
:>> > > I'm really confused
On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 09:09:36AM +, Antony T Curtis wrote:
> Kris Kennaway wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 09:30:33AM +0100, Hartmann, O. wrote:
> > > Dear Sirs.
> > >
> > > I'm really confused and surprised by the fact, that with the upcoming new
> > > FreeBSD 4.3 in its make.conf w
On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Antony T Curtis wrote:
:>Kris Kennaway wrote:
:>>
:>> On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 09:30:33AM +0100, Hartmann, O. wrote:
:>> > Dear Sirs.
:>> >
:>> > I'm really confused and surprised by the fact, that with the upcoming new
:>> > FreeBSD 4.3 in its make.conf we can choose architect
On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote:
Dear Kris.
I asure you: the only flag was -march=i686 and -O on both kernel
and system code flags.
The phenomenon was that a local ypbind couldn't contact the local or
any remote ypserver and it disappeared exactly then when removing
the i686 option (and
Kris Kennaway wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 09:30:33AM +0100, Hartmann, O. wrote:
> > Dear Sirs.
> >
> > I'm really confused and surprised by the fact, that with the upcoming new
> > FreeBSD 4.3 in its make.conf we can choose architectural parameters for the
> > CPU architecture. And I will
13 matches
Mail list logo
