Have you filed a bug with Sun about this issue? -Kyle H
On 2/27/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Glad this licked it [yes I was that guest, forgot to sign my note, sorry.] > > One thing about -xdepend is that Solaris cc 5.x is unrolling one of our > loops incorrectly. If someone wants to simplify, try reducing the complex > for (;;) and while () loops to avoid (;;x++, y++) or (;x[c++] +=x;) sorts > of grammers which have apparently confounded the optimizer. > > Bill > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] via RT wrote: > > via RT schrieb: > > > >>The fix is trivial; in the solaris-x86-cc line of Configure, you must > >>replace -fast -xO5 with -fast -xdepend=no (note: -xO5 was implied by > >>the -fast argument.) The implicit -xdepend=yes implied by -fast was > >>causing this failure. > >> > >>There may be further code fixes in the evp code to ensure that data > >>dependencies in the loops can be unrolled and optimized. > >> > >> > > > > > > excellent! > > now it works fine > > > > > > thanks a lot ! > > > > > > best regards, > > > > Steffen > > > > > > -- > > Steffen Unger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org > > Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org > > Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org > Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org > Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
