Subject: Re: uninitialized vars
To: Christos Zoulas <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: James Chacon <jmc@NetBSD.org>
Date: 10/18/2005 10:27:17
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 11:14:54AM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> On Oct 18, 9:15am, jmc@NetBSD.org (James Chacon) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: uninitialized vars
> | On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 03:30:59PM +0200, Jaka Jejcic wrote:
> | > > We default to -O2 not to -O. Maybe that is your problem.
> | >
> | > yep... that's it.
> | > Thank you all.
> | Arbitrarily setting the -O level will possibly bite you anyways depending on
> | places that may tickle compiler bugs at different settings.
> | It's generally safer to let the system -O options remain in place and only
> | add -m options as needed.
> Indeed; when I compiled my sparc64 system with -O6, I had to patch binutils
> for things to work.
-O6? Doesn't gcc top out at -O3?