Re: web Browsers (Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT)

2002-03-17 Thread Greg Black
David O'Brien wrote: | On Sat, Mar 16, 2002 at 06:05:13AM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: | Garrett Wollman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | What problems do you have with it? | | Slow. Eats memory. Crashes all the time. Does not save state | between sessions. Does not render HTML 4

Re: web Browsers (Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT)

2002-03-17 Thread Maxim Sobolev
On Sun, 2002-03-17 at 09:56, Greg Black wrote: Joerg Wunsch wrote: | David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | | Slow. Eats memory. Crashes all the time. Does not save state | between sessions. Does not render HTML 4 properly. Does not support | CSS properly. Does not zoom. Does

Re: web Browsers (Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT)

2002-03-17 Thread Greg Black
Maxim Sobolev wrote: | On Sun, 2002-03-17 at 09:56, Greg Black wrote: | Yeah right. Galeon wouldn't even build on the last FreeBSD box | I tried it on when somebody told me to try it. | | It compiles/works here like a charm, however, if you do have problems | with it please send a problem

Re: web Browsers (Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT)

2002-03-17 Thread Thomas Hurst
* Greg Black ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Joerg Wunsch wrote: Galeon. Yeah right. Galeon wouldn't even build on the last FreeBSD box I tried it on when somebody told me to try it. Tried Skipstone? Gecko based GTK browser. -- Thomas 'Freaky' Hurst - [EMAIL PROTECTED] -

RE: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-16 Thread Jan Stocker
]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT Do you have a patch for this ? I do not fully understand the parts of GCC involved, so I need some time to verify my initial diagnosis and to create a patch. In other words - not yet :) -- Alexander Kabaev

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-16 Thread Alexander N. Kabaev
Alex are you still workin' for a patch? Yes, I am. But as I write before I am not familiar with this particular part of GCC at all, so I cannot give any estimates and even promize to produce a working patch. If some other more knowledgeable person is feeling like beating me to it, please feel

web Browsers (Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT)

2002-03-16 Thread David O'Brien
On Sat, Mar 16, 2002 at 06:05:13AM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: Garrett Wollman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What problems do you have with it? Slow. Eats memory. Crashes all the time. Does not save state between sessions. Does not render HTML 4 properly. Does not support CSS

Re: web Browsers (Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT)

2002-03-16 Thread Dag-Erling Smorgrav
David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I use Opera 6. [...] Please try http://www.techiegold.com/ with Opera 6. No problem: http://www.ofug.org/~des/techiegold.png DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe

Re: web Browsers (Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT)

2002-03-16 Thread Dag-Erling Smorgrav
Rich Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What about http://www.dice.com/jobsearch/index.html http://www.ofug.org/~des/dice.png (the error at the top is because my proxy blocks doubleclick) DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with

Re: web Browsers (Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT)

2002-03-16 Thread Joerg Wunsch
David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Slow. Eats memory. Crashes all the time. Does not save state between sessions. Does not render HTML 4 properly. Does not support CSS properly. Does not zoom. Does not display PNG properly. Incorrectly ignores cache-control headers on images. The

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-16 Thread Giorgos Keramidas
On 2002-03-15 22:11, Kenneth Culver wrote: #include rehash.h, see the thread we had on this a few weeks back on -chat. OK, I'll look, but I disagree... Mozilla runs flawlessly for me, and renders much faster than netscape, however it loads really slow. Opera runs nicely too, although

Re: web Browsers (Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT)

2002-03-16 Thread Greg Black
Joerg Wunsch wrote: | David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | | Slow. Eats memory. Crashes all the time. Does not save state | between sessions. Does not render HTML 4 properly. Does not support | CSS properly. Does not zoom. Does not display PNG properly. | Incorrectly ignores

RE: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread Jan Stocker
PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 06:36:05PM +0100, Jan Stocker wrote: 2) Bug is in os delivered gcc but not in port gcc. a) port has more or less patches / os gcc has been modified -- Didn't someone told they are the same

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread Terry Lambert
Jan Stocker wrote: [ ... DWARF vs. setjmp/longjmp ... ] A little bit... most of you argumenting about binary incompatibility for -stable. OK... no chance to do it there, its my opinion too. But why not doing it for current and using that most common dwarf unwinding now (for a later ia64

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread David O'Brien
On Fri, Mar 15, 2002 at 01:37:39PM +0100, Jan Stocker wrote: A little bit... most of you argumenting about binary incompatibility for -stable. OK... no chance to do it there, its my opinion too. But why not doing it for current and using that most common dwarf unwinding now (for a There is no

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread Kenneth Culver
I guess it's possible to change over entirely. That would mean we would loase a.out support because the GNU tools are becoming incapable of supporting a.out (all machines we run on are Linux machines syndrome). If we really wanted to avoid problems like this in the future, we'd just scrap

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread David O'Brien
On Fri, Mar 15, 2002 at 04:54:59PM -0500, Kenneth Culver wrote: At the risk of being yelled at, I have a question: Why do we still need to support a.out? I know that a lot of people MIGHT still have some a.out binaries lying around, but FreeBSD's default binary format has been ELF for 3 or 4

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread Kenneth Culver
At the risk of being yelled at, I have a question: Why do we still need to support a.out? I know that a lot of people MIGHT still have some a.out binaries lying around, but FreeBSD's default binary format has been ELF for 3 or 4 years (Since 3.0-3.1 I believe). I'm not saying that we

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread David O'Brien
On Fri, Mar 15, 2002 at 05:26:37PM -0500, Kenneth Culver wrote: At the risk of being yelled at, I have a question: Why do we still need to support a.out? I know that a lot of people MIGHT still have some a.out ... Rather than offer $0.02, send the patch. Well, I was just asking if it is

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread Terry Lambert
Kenneth Culver wrote: At the risk of being yelled at, I have a question: Why do we still need to support a.out? I know that a lot of people MIGHT still have some a.out binaries lying around, but FreeBSD's default binary format has been ELF for 3 or 4 years (Since 3.0-3.1 I believe). I'm not

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread Kenneth Culver
We aren't changing this for GCC 2.95 in 5-CURRENT. PEROID. There is zero reason for subjecting users to this ABI change for what would be gained. If you want to do something productive, submit patches that Bmake GCC 3.1 (which move us to Dwarf2 unwinding as a product). Oh ok, that's

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread Kenneth Culver
At the risk of being yelled at, I have a question: Why do we still need to support a.out? I know that a lot of people MIGHT still have some a.out binaries lying around, but FreeBSD's default binary format has been ELF for 3 or 4 years (Since 3.0-3.1 I believe). I'm not saying that we

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread Terry Lambert
Kenneth Culver wrote: Other reasons I haven't even thought of yet 8-). Yeah, I was just wondering if there were issues making us keep a.out stuff in FreeBSD aside from the I wanna run 2.2.x programs issue. Linking with third party a.out libraries. Other reasons I haven't even thought

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread Matthew D. Fuller
[ Trim the CC's a bit ] On Fri, Mar 15, 2002 at 04:00:08PM -0800 I heard the voice of Terry Lambert, and lo! it spake thus: Kenneth Culver wrote: Other reasons I haven't even thought of yet 8-). Yeah, I was just wondering if there were issues making us keep a.out stuff in FreeBSD

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread Greg Black
[Cc's trimmed] Kenneth Culver wrote: | (ttypa):{1078}% file /usr/local/lib/netscape/communicator-4.7.us.bin | /usr/local/lib/netscape/communicator-4.7.us.bin: FreeBSD/i386 compact |demand paged dynamically linked executable | | Now, if you'd like to talk Netscape into building a version

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread Kenneth Culver
It's less slow and much more reliable than mozilla and remains the only available browser that can access most of the sites I need to access. That's odd, I've never had any mozilla problems. All I know is that it doesn't crash on sites that Netscape crashes on (anything java) and for me it

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread Kenneth Culver
That's odd, I've never had any mozilla problems. All I know is that it doesn't crash on sites that Netscape crashes on (anything java) and for me it runs much faster than netscape. It loads slower, but renders pages much faster, and I tend to load my browser once per day, and just leave it

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread Julian Elischer
On Sat, 16 Mar 2002, Greg Black wrote: [Cc's trimmed] Kenneth Culver wrote: | (ttypa):{1078}% file /usr/local/lib/netscape/communicator-4.7.us.bin | /usr/local/lib/netscape/communicator-4.7.us.bin: FreeBSD/i386 compact |demand paged dynamically linked executable | | Now, if

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread Brian T . Schellenberger
On Friday 15 March 2002 08:53 pm, Kenneth Culver wrote: | (ttypa):{1078}% file /usr/local/lib/netscape/communicator-4.7.us.bin | /usr/local/lib/netscape/communicator-4.7.us.bin: FreeBSD/i386 compact |demand paged dynamically linked executable | | Now, if you'd like to talk Netscape into

RE: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread Benjamin P. Grubin
Culver; Matthew D. Fuller Cc: Terry Lambert; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT On Friday 15 March 2002 08:53 pm, Kenneth Culver wrote: | (ttypa):{1078}% file /usr/local/lib/netscape/communicator-4.7.us.bin | /usr/local/lib

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread Garrett Wollman
[Unnecessary carbon copies trimmed.] On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 22:41:26 -0500, Brian T.Schellenberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: If you mean the FreeBSD-native netscape 4.x; yes, it's perfectly silly to run *that*. I don't see anything silly about it. It works with all the Web sites I care about

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread Terry Lambert
Brian T.Schellenberger wrote: Well, the linux-netscape 4 is the only browser I know that can handle Java pages on FreeBSD. Are there others? If you mean the FreeBSD-native netscape 4.x; yes, it's perfectly silly to run *that*. 4.7 does this just fine, if you don't move the mouse until

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread Dag-Erling Smorgrav
Garrett Wollman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What problems do you have with it? Slow. Eats memory. Crashes all the time. Does not save state between sessions. Does not render HTML 4 properly. Does not support CSS properly. Does not zoom. Does not display PNG properly. Incorrectly ignores

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-15 Thread Terry Lambert
Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: Garrett Wollman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What problems do you have with it? Slow. Eats memory. Crashes all the time. Does not save state between sessions. Does not render HTML 4 properly. Does not support CSS properly. Does not zoom. Does not display PNG

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-14 Thread Martin Blapp
Per thread exception stacks? THat's where I'd look... Hmm, good point. The programms that crashed were all threaded ... Martin To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-14 Thread Alexander Kabaev
This is a case of exception context register getting clobbered in shared library function call. GCC does not reload it when needed and this ultimately leads to semi-random word in program memory decremented by the __cp_pop_exception function. The bug is only triggered under very specific

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-14 Thread Alexander Kabaev
This is a case of exception context register getting clobbered in shared library function call. GCC does not reload it when needed and this ultimately leads to semi-random word in program memory decremented by the __cp_pop_exception function. The bug is only triggered under very specific

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-14 Thread Martin Blapp
Hi, This is a case of exception context register getting clobbered in shared library function call. GCC does not reload it when needed and this ultimately leads to semi-random word in program memory decremented by the __cp_pop_exception function. The bug is only triggered under very

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-14 Thread M. Warner Losh
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : M. Warner Losh wrote: : In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : Ed Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : : Exception-handling is broken with -O in -stable, and has been for years. : : FreeBSD is one of the few

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-14 Thread Alexander Kabaev
Do you have a patch for this ? I do not fully understand the parts of GCC involved, so I need some time to verify my initial diagnosis and to create a patch. In other words - not yet :) -- Alexander Kabaev To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in

RE: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-14 Thread Jan Stocker
PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT Do you have a patch for this ? I do not fully understand the parts of GCC involved, so I need some time to verify my initial diagnosis and to create a patch

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-14 Thread M. Warner Losh
Do you have a small, reproducible test case? Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-14 Thread ozan s. yigit
in a related tangential note, i recently found (out of sheer irritation) in less than an hour that several (including the latest) versions of GCC -O and -O2 failed the paranoia test in different ways, to wit: gcc -o paranoia paranoia.c [paranoia output elided] The number of DEFECTs

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-14 Thread David O'Brien
On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 06:36:05PM +0100, Jan Stocker wrote: 2) Bug is in os delivered gcc but not in port gcc. a) port has more or less patches / os gcc has been modified -- Didn't someone told they are the same? Port has less patches. If you look at

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-14 Thread Alexander Kabaev
2) Bug is in os delivered gcc but not in port gcc. a) port has more or less patches / os gcc has been modified -- Didn't someone told they are the same? GCC from ports uses DWARF2 exception unwinding while GCC in src tree uses sjlj exceptions. The exception handling code generated by

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-14 Thread Steve Kargl
On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 12:59:31PM -0500, ozan s. yigit wrote: in a related tangential note, i recently found (out of sheer irritation) in less than an hour that several (including the latest) versions of GCC -O and -O2 failed the paranoia test in different ways, to wit: gcc -o paranoia

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-14 Thread David O'Brien
On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 01:20:51PM -0500, Alexander Kabaev wrote: b) other options were set at compile time -- Why dont change to the same in the port? Leads it to a broken world? If the only difference is the lost of binary compatibility, i would

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-14 Thread ozan s. yigit
Add the -ffloat-store flag to your compilation flags (or add -msoft-float). that really means for this compiler on certain platforms, you can have slow and correct or fast and incorrect, but NOT fast and correct. oz --- freedom has a mental cost. -- peter roosen-runge To Unsubscribe: send

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-14 Thread Raymond Wiker
ozan s. yigit writes: Add the -ffloat-store flag to your compilation flags (or add -msoft-float). that really means for this compiler on certain platforms, you can have slow and correct or fast and incorrect, but NOT fast and correct. Actually, if -ffloat-store is the

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-14 Thread David O'Brien
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 10:24:20PM +0100, Martin Blapp wrote: We are using a set of patches that were part of gcc 2.95.3_test3. Do you have a sample program in which exceptions are still broken on FreeBSD 4.5? cd /usr/ports/devel/stlport make install cd work/STL*/test/eh add -O to

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-14 Thread Steve Kargl
On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 07:50:38PM +0100, Raymond Wiker wrote: ozan s. yigit writes: Add the -ffloat-store flag to your compilation flags (or add -msoft-float). that really means for this compiler on certain platforms, you can have slow and correct or fast and incorrect, but

float [was Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT]

2002-03-14 Thread ozan s. yigit
If you really want to investigate FreeBSD FP/math capabilities search for UCBTEST or visit www.cs.berkeley.edu/~jhauser/arithmetic/TestFloat.html cool! thanks for the pointer. oz --- gag reflex is an essential part of computing. -- anon To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-14 Thread Terry Lambert
Jan Stocker wrote: So now i am a little bit confused... State of the art: 1) Bug is in -stable and -current -- This means possible patches only in -current arent responsible for this behaviour Unless they were MFC'ed to -STABLE. THis is why you generally should compare -RELEASE

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-14 Thread Bruce Evans
On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, ozan s. yigit wrote: Add the -ffloat-store flag to your compilation flags (or add -msoft-float). that really means for this compiler on certain platforms, you can have slow and correct or fast and incorrect, but NOT fast and correct. I think fast and correct is

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-13 Thread Martin Blapp
Hi, Here are my test news. The -O bug doesn't happen with gcc295 from ports ! I tried all these FLAGS, but noone of them was creating the problems we see with -O : Optimization Options -fcaller-saves -fcse-follow-jumps -fcse-skip-blocks -fdelayed-branch -felide-constructors

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-13 Thread Martin Blapp
STABLE is broken too, but in a different manner. I just added -O and then this happened. [algo] :testing inplace_merge #1() (weak) ... eh_test in free(): warning: junk pointer, too high to make sense eh_test in free(): warning: junk pointer, too high to make sense eh_test in free(): warning:

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-13 Thread Martin Blapp
I removed now #undef DEFAULT_VTABLE_THUNKS and set again #define DWARF2_UNWIND_INFO 1 in the port. The -O tests still succeeded. All cpp* files are the same in the port and our system compilers. And ideas and pointers which subsystems I could test for this breakage ? Martin To Unsubscribe:

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-13 Thread Ed Hall
Exception-handling is broken with -O in -stable, and has been for years. FreeBSD is one of the few systems that use setjmp/longjmp stack unwinds to implement exceptions, so when the GCC folks broke that path, it was never fixed. There are supposedly patches floating around that fix the problem,

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-13 Thread David O'Brien
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 12:15:34PM -0800, Ed Hall wrote: Exception-handling is broken with -O in -stable, and has been for years. FreeBSD is one of the few systems that use setjmp/longjmp stack unwinds to implement exceptions, so when the GCC folks broke that path, it was never fixed. There

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-13 Thread Martin Blapp
We are using a set of patches that were part of gcc 2.95.3_test3. Do you have a sample program in which exceptions are still broken on FreeBSD 4.5? cd /usr/ports/devel/stlport make install cd work/STL*/test/eh add -O to gcc-freebsd.mk gmake -f gcc-freebsd.mk clean gmake -f gcc-freebsd.mk

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-13 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 02:08:55PM +0100, Martin Blapp wrote: I removed now #undef DEFAULT_VTABLE_THUNKS and set again #define DWARF2_UNWIND_INFO 1 in the port. The -O tests still succeeded. All cpp* files are the same in the port and our system compilers. And ideas and pointers which

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-13 Thread Martin Blapp
Hi Kris, Did you pursue my suggestion of comparing recent patches in the port and in the source tree? Easy to say, hard to do. STABLE is broken as current is, and it seems that 4.4 and 4.3 are also broken for the STLport test. This is a very difficult thing to do for someone that does not

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-13 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 11:42:46PM +0100, Martin Blapp wrote: Hi Kris, Did you pursue my suggestion of comparing recent patches in the port and in the source tree? Easy to say, hard to do. STABLE is broken as current is, and it seems that 4.4 and 4.3 are also broken for the STLport

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-13 Thread Martin Blapp
Kris, fixes things, or at least identify a list of possible changes which others can test. How can I compile gcc without doing a make world ? Martin To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-13 Thread Kenneth Culver
cd /usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/cc make make install On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Martin Blapp wrote: Kris, fixes things, or at least identify a list of possible changes which others can test. How can I compile gcc without doing a make world ? Martin To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-13 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 11:49:52PM +0100, Martin Blapp wrote: Kris, fixes things, or at least identify a list of possible changes which others can test. How can I compile gcc without doing a make world ? cd /usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/cc make all Kris msg36045/pgp0.pgp

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-13 Thread Ed Hall
I wrote: : This problem should exist in -current since I think FreeBSD finally drops ^^ That should be shouldn't. I shouldn't post in a hurry (like I'm doing now). -Ed To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-13 Thread M. Warner Losh
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ed Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : Exception-handling is broken with -O in -stable, and has been for years. : FreeBSD is one of the few systems that use setjmp/longjmp stack unwinds : to implement exceptions, so when the GCC folks broke that path, it was

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-13 Thread Terry Lambert
M. Warner Losh wrote: In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ed Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : Exception-handling is broken with -O in -stable, and has been for years. : FreeBSD is one of the few systems that use setjmp/longjmp stack unwinds : to implement exceptions, so when the GCC

Re: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-12 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Tue, Mar 12, 2002 at 01:49:02AM +0100, Martin Blapp wrote: Hi all, Here are my test news. The -O bug doesn't happen with gcc295 from ports ! Since this problem was apparently introduced recently, can you check the commits against the gcc code in -current with the patches to the port?

RE: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-11 Thread Jan Stocker
Hello... isn't anyone workin on this prob? Or do i have a leak in my mailbox? Jan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jan Stocker Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 9:15 AM To: Martin Blapp; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: gcc -O broken

RE: gcc -O broken in CURRENT

2002-03-11 Thread Martin Blapp
Hi all, Here are my test news. The -O bug doesn't happen with gcc295 from ports ! Previously I had stated before, the gcc295 from ports did not work too. but it seems that that was a user error :-) /usr/ports/devel/stlport (and the tests test/eh) can be succesfully be made. My staroffice