This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc 3.2.1 schedule?
- From: prj at po dot cwru dot edu (Paul Jarc)
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 17:37:56 -0500
- Subject: Re: gcc 3.2.1 schedule?
- Organization: What did you have in mind? A short, blunt, human pyramid?
- References: <200210312207.g9VM7OL18301@piper.synopsys.com>
Joe Buck <jbuck@synopsys.com> wrote:
> Paul Jarc wrote:
>> Yes: I used an existing 3.2 build and added -fno-strict-aliasing to
>> STAGE1_CFLAGS for a 2.95.3 build, and there were no errors this time.
Scratch that. I accidentally started with 2.95.3 instead of 3.2 for
that build.
> Now I'm confused. Doesn't stage 1 (where, in your case, 2.95.3 is being
> built for the first time by 3.2) run without optimization at all?
Um. Actually, my build script was using -O2 for both STAGE1_CFLAGS
and BOOT_CFLAGS. I guess that's bad. I've changed it now to use -O2
for only BOOT_CFLAGS, and I'm now running a build starting with 3.2
(really, this time), without -fno-strict-aliasing, and with -O2 only
in BOOT_CFLAGS, not STAGE1_CFLAGS. I'll let you know how it turns
out.
But Janis Johnson said she reproduced the same failure - Janis, do you
know whether you were using optimization for STAGE1_CFLAGS?
paul