Re: duplicate -ffreestanding in kernel build

2002-06-16 Thread Bruce Evans
On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Terry Lambert wrote: Bruce Evans wrote: printf( const string); - pusts( const string); That is an incredibly *fugly* optimization. It assumes that I use libc, unless I have -ffreestanding, and it assumes my implementation of printf vs. puts. This is a

Re: duplicate -ffreestanding in kernel build

2002-06-16 Thread Terry Lambert
Bruce Evans wrote: It's routine to assume that I'm going to use libc?!? No. It is routine to assume that users use a library that meets the compiler's requirements (the compiler gets to decide, not the users; it is only constrained by the relevant standards and historical (mal)practice).

Re: duplicate -ffreestanding in kernel build

2002-06-15 Thread Terry Lambert
Bruce Evans wrote: This is a bug in bsd.kern.mk. -ffreestanding never belonged there, since it is also needed for modules and perhaps for boot programs and libstand. Module makefiles still include bsd.kern.mk, but Makefiles for boot programs have regressed. Your x86 box must be out of

Re: duplicate -ffreestanding in kernel build

2002-06-15 Thread Maxime Henrion
Terry Lambert wrote: What exactly does this do, besides implying -fno-builtin? The documentation says and implies main has no special requirements... Neither the kernel nor modules have a main, so the only thing that's relevent here is the -fno-builtin, right? IIRC, -ffreestanding

Re: duplicate -ffreestanding in kernel build

2002-06-15 Thread Terry Lambert
Maxime Henrion wrote: Terry Lambert wrote: What exactly does this do, besides implying -fno-builtin? The documentation says and implies main has no special requirements... Neither the kernel nor modules have a main, so the only thing that's relevent here is the -fno-builtin, right?

Re: duplicate -ffreestanding in kernel build

2002-06-15 Thread Garrett Wollman
On Sat, 15 Jun 2002 12:49:29 -0700, Maxime Henrion [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: IIRC, -ffreestanding prevented GCC3 from being stupid optimizations like `-ffreestanding' tells the compiler that it is to operate as a free-standing implementation (in the words of the C standard); i.e., that there is

Re: duplicate -ffreestanding in kernel build

2002-06-15 Thread Mark Valentine
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Lambert) Date: Sat 15 Jun, 2002 Subject: Re: duplicate -ffreestanding in kernel build That is an incredibly *fugly* optimization. It assumes that I use libc, unless I have -ffreestanding, and it assumes my implementation of printf vs. puts. It means you

Re: duplicate -ffreestanding in kernel build

2002-06-15 Thread Bruce Evans
On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Terry Lambert wrote: Maxime Henrion wrote: Terry Lambert wrote: What exactly does this do, besides implying -fno-builtin? The documentation says and implies main has no special requirements... Neither the kernel nor modules have a main, so the only thing

Re: duplicate -ffreestanding in kernel build

2002-06-15 Thread Terry Lambert
Bruce Evans wrote: printf( const string); - pusts( const string); That is an incredibly *fugly* optimization. It assumes that I use libc, unless I have -ffreestanding, and it assumes my implementation of printf vs. puts. This is a routine optimization. It assumes that you use a C

Re: duplicate -ffreestanding in kernel build

2002-06-15 Thread Bruce Evans
On Fri, 14 Jun 2002, Maxime Henrion wrote: I recently noticed that we are adding the -ffreestanding flag twice for kernel builds. It's added once if GCC3 is defined in /usr/share/mk/bsd.kern.mk and another time inconditionally in /sys/conf/kern.pre.mk. As a result, I have -ffreestanding

duplicate -ffreestanding in kernel build

2002-06-14 Thread Maxime Henrion
Hi all, I recently noticed that we are adding the -ffreestanding flag twice for kernel builds. It's added once if GCC3 is defined in /usr/share/mk/bsd.kern.mk and another time inconditionally in /sys/conf/kern.pre.mk. As a result, I have -ffreestanding once on my x86 box still running