On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Mobile Mouse <
mous...@gmail.com> wrote:
> FWIW, I've had problems with GCC above 4.8.* on Mac OS X - everything builds
> fine, but the cryptest.exe dies with SEGV. Same with 4.9.*, same with 5.1.
> So I'm building with clang, which doesn't seem to exhibit such problems.
OK, so it sounds like I need to do more testing.
Where did you get you GCC for OS X? MacPorts or Brew? Or did you build
it yourself? (I'm suspect of GCC on OS X because Apple abandoned it.
Even when it was being developed, they were not actively supplying
patches upstream).
I have not been able to duplicate the SEGV on Debian, Ubuntu, Mint,
Oracle or Fedora. And I have i386 and x86_64 test systems set up for
them just for testing compilers.
I was able to duplicate it on Cygwin. But they don't have a bug
reporter, so I think there's little hope it will be fixed. I think its
easier just to keep them at -O2 until they fix their processes.
> On the thread subject - I think it's OK. Whoever for whatever reasons needs
> lower optimization level, can accomplish it with vi. :-)
Its even easier than vi: `make OPTIMIZE = -Ox` will work just fine.
That's the benefit of using GNU Make or any non-anemic Make (Posix
Make is pathetically anemic).
Maybe breaking out the OPTIMIZE and setting it to -O2 is all we need.
(Though it may not be apparent, this will help with the Crypto++
engineering process when CI is cut-in)
Jeff
> On Jul 6, 2015, at 06:39, Jeffrey Walton <
nolo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If there are no objections, I am going to commit this today.
>
> On Friday, July 3, 2015 at 10:45:40 AM UTC-4, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
>>
>> And yet another change after more testing... It appears Cygwin's GCC still
>> has problems in 4.9.
>>
>> ...