1 |
On Fri, 2003-05-16 at 01:20, Spider wrote: |
2 |
> hi folks, |
3 |
> here is an initial ebuild of gcc 3.3, it doesn't contain propolice |
4 |
> patch, and I haven't checked it with "build" or other flags except the |
5 |
> default. (its slow to build on this machine) |
6 |
|
7 |
There is an ebuild for it on bugzilla and one here and some on forums |
8 |
too. Have you used any of these as a definitive base or is this a new |
9 |
creation? |
10 |
|
11 |
Also, is there any sign of this being entered into hardmasked or testig |
12 |
state on portage? |
13 |
|
14 |
I'd be quite keen on testing it out since I have had my fair share of |
15 |
pentium4 problems and am desperately hoping an upgrade of gcc will sort |
16 |
them out. |
17 |
|
18 |
Pardon my ignorance but have all these patches been commented out to |
19 |
prevent resultant problems or because they are no longer necessary? |
20 |
|
21 |
Also, as a short note to those devs making a cflags guide to say that |
22 |
the optimisation options have changed somewhat for gcc 3.3; an example |
23 |
being -fomit-frame-pointer is now enabled by -O3 (taken from online |
24 |
manual). |
25 |
|
26 |
With regards |
27 |
Dhruba Bandopadhyay |
28 |
|
29 |
|
30 |
-- |
31 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |