From: Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [releng_6 tinderbox] failure on sparc64/sparc64 Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 19:40:42 -0700
> Warner Losh wrote: > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dag-Erling Smørgrav) > > Subject: Re: [releng_6 tinderbox] failure on sparc64/sparc64 > > Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 11:53:38 +0100 > > > > > >>Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> > >>>COPTFLAGS=-O -pipe according to the tinderbox logs. > >> > >>Hmm, yes, apparently it only uses -O2 on HEAD. > > > > > > Can we not have special flags for tinderbox builds? It make > > pre-commit testing a big pita. How about just -O on both head and in > > RELENG_6? The kernel make files have special magic to disable the > > parts of -O2 that are known to be bad because tinderbox uses -O2, > > despite efforts in the past to stop the practice. > > > > Warner > > > > > > There is value in testing -O2, since enabling that is a good long-term > goal. What might be nice is to run tinderboxes with all default > compiler settings, and then once or twice a week to a special run that > has the more experimental flags. My point is that it is unreasonable to get bitched at for tinerbox breakages that don't show up when building lint because the tinderbox person is too stubborn to not use non-standard flags. Warner _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
