-current 'make release' status? [SOLVED]

Bruce Evans bde at zeta.org.au
Tue Jul 29 15:18:52 PDT 2003


On Tue, 29 Jul 2003, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 06:14:17AM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 Jul 2003, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> >
> > > ...
> > > Forget what I've said about NO_WERROR, it (unfortunately) only
> > > applies to the userland.
> > >
> > > Still, running "make rerelease KERNEL_FLAGS=WERROR=" gets the
> > > release done.
> > >
> > > I wondered why I get it, and similarly my nigthly "buildkernel"
> > > completed without errors.  This turned out to be due to the
> > > -O vs. -Os differences.  For example, compiling vfs_subr.o
> > > from the GENERIC kernel results in these same warnings when
> > > compiled with COPTFLAGS="-Os -pipe".  Peter, should we switch
> > > -Werror back off in kern.pre.mk?
> >
> > Use -fno-strict-aliasing if you use -Os.  Otherwise, -Os is stricter
        ^^

This was too complete :-).  I meant -Wno-strict-aliasing when I wrote it
(since I misread the info about -Os).

> > than -O.
> >
> > On second thoughts, -Os implies -f-strict-aliasing because -Os may
> > need strict aliasing for the same reasons as -O2.  We've seen -O2
> > in combination with broken aliasing in libm cause fatal errors.
> > Better find part of -O2 that needs strict aliasing and turn it off
> > too.
> >
> Hm, I always thought that -O2 and -Os are just useful aliases
> that in effect only turn a few dozens of -f optimization flags,
> and that switching some of them off later is allowed.  I.e.,
> "-Os -fno-strict-aliasing" should work.

Yes, this seems to be the only option that needs warnings about strict
aliasing.

Bruce


More information about the freebsd-current mailing list