On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 06:19:00PM +0300, Danny Braniss wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 08:44:34AM -0600, Scott Long wrote: > > > >No, I'm not going to do it because of lack of knowledge, there are > > > >people who have more experience with it than me. > > > > > > > Well, as I said in another email, switching to GCC 4 just because of > > > dubious "25% faster" (faster at what? compiling? resulting generated > > > code? crashing?) claims in the changelog is not a terribly good > > > reason =-) > > > > 25% faster to compile the code, not running it. > > so that closes the argument! i can do a makeworld in about 25 minutes, cutting > it down by 6 minutes will not make any real difference, but it will take > much longer to recode all the 'usupported features'. if you have an > application that takes hours to compile, then please, go ahead and use GCC 4. Do not forget about pointyhat which compiles a tons of ports. Switching it to gcc-4.0 would decrease builds time, and it's not a bad idea IMHO. But since I'm not going to handle it, I better shut up and let another people take decision. -KirillReceived on Mon Apr 25 2005 - 13:26:48 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:32 UTC