The following reply was made to PR port-xen/29887; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: christos@zoulas.com (Christos Zoulas)
To: YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamt@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp>
Cc: gnats-bugs@netbsd.org, port-xen-maintainer@netbsd.org,
	gnats-admin@netbsd.org, netbsd-bugs@netbsd.org,
	tech-userlevel@netbsd.org
Subject: Re: port-xen/29887: sysctl kern.consdev coredumps
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 09:25:56 -0400

 On Jun 17,  9:11pm, yamt@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp (YAMAMOTO Takashi) wrote:
 -- Subject: Re: port-xen/29887: sysctl kern.consdev coredumps
 
 | adding a hack to libc for the broken compiler is saner?
 | i don't think so.
 
 I don't think so either, but when you ask the compiler to call printf(),
 and it calls puts() because it `knows' it is better, what else are you
 left with?
 
 | the fundamental problem is that gcc ignores the well-known but non-standard
 | behaviour of printf.  fixing gcc is the right fix.
 | 
 | IMO, changing puts is the worst choice because it introduces
 | another non-standard extension.
 | no surprise if a future version of gcc break it. :-)
 
 I am fine with disabling the optimization, but as I said, it will make
 our compiler different. I would rather convince the gcc team to consider
 turning the bogus behavior off permanently.
 
 christos