On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 12:45:58PM +0100, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 09:46:30AM -0300, wrote:
> > I've seen the standard qmail compilation flags are just "-O2".
> >
> > Does anybody tried any other level of optimization like
> > "-O6... -fomit-frame-pointer... -DCPU=686..." ? What would be the benefits
> > of compiling with these flags ? Is this safe ?
> I doubt if it is safe.
This should all be safe on stable compilers.
> > I'm using egcs version egcs-1.1.2-30 in a Linux box.
> Ah, egcs. No, it is not safe. egcs is a crack-product.
Actually, egcs 1.1.2 is quite stable and safe. I've never had it break
working C or C++ code.
> > ( I know this is more of a compiler issue, but I think it is worth to
> > exchange experiences... )
> qmail is hardly CPU-intensive, it spends very little time in loops
> without any I/O. I think the benefits would be small.
This, however, is very true. It is very rare that any part of qmail
will take significant amounts of CPU time.
--
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/
PGP signature
