On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 20:15:17 +0000, Wahib Nackad wrote: > Hello Michel, > > Sorry for the long time before replaying to your message. I was busy to > found the problem related to X and finaly found it. It was related to the > fact that I've used the following optimization FLAGS to compile it and it > look like X don't like it at all. More than that, I cannot compile X with > optimization FLAGS and if I do it, then it will segmenfault on the binary. > Seem strange to me that a software like XFree86 cannot use optimization > FLAGS durring compile time. Here is what I used as optimization --> "-O2 > -march=i686 -funroll-loops" and XFree86 fail. Again without the previous > optimization FLAGS, all run ok. > > For me, this mean that XFree86 cannot be compiled to get advantage of i686 > CPU architecture :((
I would think about this in a different way. In my point of view, this is a code generation bug in the compiler (gcc?). In a perfect world, any piece of source code should compile and work perfectly even with the most exotic optimization flags turned on. I also had this problem with other software. Most of the time I could determine _one_ source file that will be broken with _one_ certain optimization option. I would at first try to build without the -funroll-loops option. Regards, Tino -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] dipl.-inf. Innominate Security Technologies AG software engineer networking people tel: +49.30.6392-3308 http://www.innominate.com/ _______________________________________________ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
