--On Saturday, October 25, 2003 10:14:14 -0400 Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Larry Rosenman wrote:just a warning on each compile and no optimization.>> After further consideration, I think that the recent patch series that >> tried to centralize the CFLAGS handling in configure should be >> reverted to configure.in revision 1.293. Otherwise, it's much to >> complicated to handle all the special cases. There is, after all, a >> reason we have been forced to keep it this way all these years. > > Remember the old code had CFLAGS="" in lots of platforms, meaning they > got no optimization. > > It seems right now Alpha is our only problem, and it is really just a > message problem because the later flags override the earlier ones. Why > can't get just remove -O2 from the alpha CFLAGS line via makefile > magic? Frankly, we could just do CFLAGS="-O" and be done with it > because we would not be bringing in the -O2, but I would rather keep > it clean and remove just -O2. We also get -g on UnixWare cc (NOT gcc) builds, which we didn't before, which means we do NOT get optimization (UnixWare's cc doesn't like -O and -g together).
We are going to fix that, but what happens? Does the compile fail or does optimization just get turned off?
LER
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
-- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
