Bug#764732: gcc-4.9: broken -O2 optimizations on armhf

peter green wrote: Matthias Klose wrote: there exist several workarounds for it (lowering the optimization, using gcc-4.8, ...). Disabling stack protector also seems to result in a succesful compile (reducing it from strong to regular does not). And another workaround is to use -marm. -- To

Bug#764732: gcc-4.9: broken -O2 optimizations on armhf

Matthias Klose wrote: there exist several workarounds for it (lowering the optimization, using gcc-4.8, ...). Disabling stack protector also seems to result in a succesful compile (reducing it from strong to regular does not). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-requ...@lists.debian.org w

Processed: Re: Bug#764732: gcc-4.9: broken -O2 optimizations on armhf

Processing control commands: > tags -1 + help Bug #764732 [gcc-4.9] gcc-4.9: broken -O2 optimizations on armhf Added tag(s) help. -- 764732: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=764732 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email t

Bug#764732: gcc-4.9: broken -O2 optimizations on armhf

Control: tags -1 + help this is not seen on the gcc-4.9 Linaro branch, so a ARM porter should identify the relevant backport. On 12/25/2014 06:12 AM, Matthias Klose wrote: > the escalation is wrong. there exist several workarounds for it (lowering the > optimization, using gcc-4.8, ...). I asked