Then this is clearly a gcc bug.
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 3:45 PM, jordan <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The danger of -O3 (long gone, to my knowledge) is to the compiled
>> code, not the compiler. An internal compiler error is just that (or
>> faulty hardware).
>
> James (the OP) never mentioned what version of gcc he is using, but if
> it is 4.8.0 (which i expect might be the case) then yes, NON- code
> fails to compile... and you are also wrong to suggest stricter and
> heavier optimization levels won't potentially break compilation or
> cause undesired behavior (ie: "danger"), it does and will, depending
> on a variety of factors.
>
> anyway, James is correct, I have verified exactly what he has written
> ~ using -O2 allows non-daw and friends to compile (with gcc-4.8.0).
>
> cheers
>
> jordan
>
>> On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 3:07 PM, James Morris <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> hi,
>>>
>>> just a note. i tried to build the non-* stuff and it failed with a
>>> internal compiler error. saw that you're using -O3 optimazation which i
>>> know is (from when i once used gentoo) frowned upon in some circles. i
>>> disabled it (via nano as i don't know waf well enough to do otherwise)
>>> and was able to build all the non-* stuff without further-ado.
>>>
>>> sorry i can't test any of this stuff out further, just wanted a quick
>>> peek. sadly no time for doing anything requiring deep involvement on pc
>>> these days.
>>>
>>> james.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
