On Thu, 30 Mar 2017, Warner Losh wrote:
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 12:23 AM, Bruce Evans wrote:
I doubt that gcc-6.3 is very broken. Did its CFLAGS even have -Os?
Yes. boot2 doesn't use the kernel CFLAGS.
I know. I even understand most of the magic.
My point was that with all the ifdef obf
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 12:42 AM, Ngie Cooper (yaneurabeya)
wrote:
>
>> On Mar 29, 2017, at 23:38, Warner Losh wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 12:23 AM, Bruce Evans wrote:
>>> I doubt that gcc-6.3 is very broken. Did its CFLAGS even have -Os?
>>
>> Yes. boot2 doesn't use the kernel CFLAGS.
> On Mar 29, 2017, at 23:38, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 12:23 AM, Bruce Evans wrote:
>> I doubt that gcc-6.3 is very broken. Did its CFLAGS even have -Os?
>
> Yes. boot2 doesn't use the kernel CFLAGS.
>
>> Kernel CFLAGS are still broken even for gcc-4.2, by sprinkling inl
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 12:23 AM, Bruce Evans wrote:
> I doubt that gcc-6.3 is very broken. Did its CFLAGS even have -Os?
Yes. boot2 doesn't use the kernel CFLAGS.
> Kernel CFLAGS are still broken even for gcc-4.2, by sprinkling inline
> parameter magic that was more needed for gcc-3.3. The ma
On Wed, 29 Mar 2017, Warner Losh wrote:
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 3:36 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message <7448826.asyms2t...@ralph.baldwin.cx>, John Baldwin writes:
On Wednesday, March 29, 2017 09:30:03 AM Ngie Cooper wrote:
Log:
Parameterize out 7680 (15 * 512) as BOOT2SIZE
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 7:24 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 29, 2017 7:04 PM, "Ngie Cooper" wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Toomas Soome wrote:
>
> ...
>
>> One thing is - for now we know the boot2 has not changed and we do not
>> really expect it to change in large scale anyhow
On Mar 29, 2017 7:04 PM, "Ngie Cooper" wrote:
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Toomas Soome wrote:
...
> One thing is - for now we know the boot2 has not changed and we do not
really expect it to change in large scale anyhow.
>
> Second thing, yes the build process needs to be tested etc, and
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Toomas Soome wrote:
...
> One thing is - for now we know the boot2 has not changed and we do not really
> expect it to change in large scale anyhow.
>
> Second thing, yes the build process needs to be tested etc, and if needed we
> can issue statement which com
> On 30. märts 2017, at 0:55, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 3:36 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp
> wrote:
>>
>> In message <7448826.asyms2t...@ralph.baldwin.cx>, John Baldwin writes:
>>> On Wednesday, March 29, 2017 09:30:03 AM Ngie Cooper wrote:
>>
Log:
Parameteriz
On 03/29/2017 17:55, Warner Losh wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 3:36 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp
> wrote:
>>
>> In message <7448826.asyms2t...@ralph.baldwin.cx>, John Baldwin writes:
>>> On Wednesday, March 29, 2017 09:30:03 AM Ngie Cooper wrote:
>>
Log:
Parameterize out 7680 (15
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 3:36 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
> In message <7448826.asyms2t...@ralph.baldwin.cx>, John Baldwin writes:
>>On Wednesday, March 29, 2017 09:30:03 AM Ngie Cooper wrote:
>
>>> Log:
>>> Parameterize out 7680 (15 * 512) as BOOT2SIZE, similar to
>>> sys/boot/i386/
In message <7448826.asyms2t...@ralph.baldwin.cx>, John Baldwin writes:
>On Wednesday, March 29, 2017 09:30:03 AM Ngie Cooper wrote:
>> Log:
>> Parameterize out 7680 (15 * 512) as BOOT2SIZE, similar to
>> sys/boot/i386/zfsboot/...
>>
>> This is being done to make it easier to chang
On Wednesday, March 29, 2017 09:30:03 AM Ngie Cooper wrote:
> Author: ngie
> Date: Wed Mar 29 09:30:03 2017
> New Revision: 316132
> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/316132
>
> Log:
> Parameterize out 7680 (15 * 512) as BOOT2SIZE, similar to
> sys/boot/i386/zfsboot/...
>
> Th
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 3:30 AM, Ngie Cooper wrote:
> Author: ngie
> Date: Wed Mar 29 09:30:03 2017
> New Revision: 316132
> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/316132
>
> Log:
> Parameterize out 7680 (15 * 512) as BOOT2SIZE, similar to
> sys/boot/i386/zfsboot/...
>
> This is being
14 matches
Mail list logo