On Tue, 6 Apr 1999, David O'Brien wrote:
> > Well what would be the chances of getting the pgcc patches committed?
>
> I'm quite interested in doing this, BUT only after the dust has settled
> on the EGCS import and the Alpha build is fixed. Also the 1.1.2 PGCC
> patches aren't available yet.
On Tue, 6 Apr 1999, David O'Brien wrote:
> > Well what would be the chances of getting the pgcc patches committed?
>
> I'm quite interested in doing this, BUT only after the dust has settled
> on the EGCS import and the Alpha build is fixed. Also the 1.1.2 PGCC
> patches aren't available yet.
> Well what would be the chances of getting the pgcc patches committed?
I'm quite interested in doing this, BUT only after the dust has settled
on the EGCS import and the Alpha build is fixed. Also the 1.1.2 PGCC
patches aren't available yet.
jdp and I have another round of bootstraping to fix
On Tue, 6 Apr 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> It's no big deal, really. I think the EGCS bandwagon is going to continue
> to move forward and PGCS runs on top of it, so moving to EGCS puts FreeBSD
> in a better position in the long term.
Well what would be the chances of getting the pg
:I doubt that that sort of benchmark is going to say an awful lot about the
:performance of the optimisation levels since compiling /usr/sr/usr.sbin is
:going to be affected by disk i/o performance far more than it would be by
:cpu performance. The relative speed differences of the different egcs/l
