[releng_6 tinderbox] failure on sparc64/sparc64
M. Warner Losh
imp at bsdimp.com
Sat Feb 4 13:36:42 PST 2006
In message: <20060204211357.GD7604 at ip.net.ua>
Ruslan Ermilov <ru at FreeBSD.org> writes:
: On Sat, Feb 04, 2006 at 09:03:13PM +0100, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote:
: > "M. Warner Losh" <imp at bsdimp.com> writes:
: > > Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav <des at des.no> writes:
: > > > As I have repeatedly pointed out in the past, -O2 catches more
: > > > bugs because it enables optimizations which require more extensive
: > > > coverage analysis.
: > > Then it should be the default, standard flag.
: > I wish. Unfortunately, there is a very vocal minority which
: > systematically opposes this kind of change.
: What breakage do you mean if tinderboxes are run without it and
: usually compile successfully? :-)
: I mean, I don't see a reason not to remove -fno-strict-aliasing
: from the kernel builds now. Perhaps it's still needed for some
: platforms that aren't covered by tinderbox, not sure... Can be
: easily checked with "make universe".
There's a dozen or two files that will fail to compile -O2 w/o it
spread through the tree.
More information about the freebsd-sparc64