Re: Hammer on snapshot cd's

["Freddie Cash" <fjwcash@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 1:41 AM, Simon 'corecode' Schubert
<corecode@fs.ei.tum.de> wrote:
> Matthew Dillon wrote:
>>
>> :>     cc -Wall x.c -c -O2
>> :>     x.c: In function 'fubar2':
>> :>     x.c:16: warning: 'error' is used uninitialized in this function
>> :> :>     (edit so *valuep is set to 0)
>> :> :>     cc -Wall x.c -c -O2
>> :>     (no warning reported)
>> :
>> :So you need to go -O2?  -O alone doesn't work?  Maybe we should -O2
>> :after the release then :)
>> :
>> :cheers
>> :   simon
>>
>>    No, we will always stick to -O.  GCC is a moving target too, even if
>>    -O2 works now there is a high chance it will break something in future
>>    GCC rolls.
>
> Why should -O2 break things and -O never break things?  That doesn't seem
> obvious to me.  I think all the breakages that happened in the last couple
> of years which were connected with optimization happened with -O, -O2 and
> -Os.
>
> There seems to be a traditional, irrational fear of -O2 in the FreeBSD
> community, which I can't explain.  I've heard something about -O2 and inline
> assembly, but that's probably old as well.

The default CFLAGS for FreeBSD 7+ (possibly 6+) includes -O2.

-- 
Freddie Cash
fjwcash@gmail.com