Stefan Kaltenbrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > *) why the large difference in the build-flags ?
CVS HEAD configure.in knows about icc and the release branches don't. I think the changes were only put into HEAD because of lack of testing, but if we have buildfarm coverage I think it'd be OK to back-port the configure logic to the prior branches. Any objections? CVS HEAD configure.in: # Some versions of GCC support some additional useful warning flags. # Check whether they are supported, and add them to CFLAGS if so. if test "$GCC" = yes; then # ICC pretends to be GCC but it's lying; it doesn't support these options. # So we have to check if "GCC" is really ICC. AC_TRY_COMPILE([], [EMAIL PROTECTED]:@ifndef __INTEL_COMPILER choke me @%:@endif], [ICC=[yes]], [ICC=[no]]) if test "$ICC" = no; then CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Winline" PGAC_PROG_CC_CFLAGS_OPT([-Wdeclaration-after-statement]) PGAC_PROG_CC_CFLAGS_OPT([-Wendif-labels]) else # Intel compiler has a bug/misoptimization in checking for # division by NAN (NaN == 0), -mp1 fixes it, so add it to the # CFLAGS. PGAC_PROG_CC_CFLAGS_OPT([-mp1]) fi # Disable strict-aliasing rules; needed for gcc 3.3+ PGAC_PROG_CC_CFLAGS_OPT([-fno-strict-aliasing]) elif test x"${CC}" = x"xlc"; then # AIX xlc has to have strict aliasing turned off too PGAC_PROG_CC_CFLAGS_OPT([-qnoansialias]) fi 8.1 equivalent code fragment: if test "$GCC" = yes; then CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Winline" # Some versions of GCC support some additional useful warning flags. # Check whether they are supported, and add them to CFLAGS if so. PGAC_PROG_CC_CFLAGS_OPT([-Wdeclaration-after-statement]) PGAC_PROG_CC_CFLAGS_OPT([-Wendif-labels]) # Disable strict-aliasing rules; needed for gcc 3.3+ PGAC_PROG_CC_CFLAGS_OPT([-fno-strict-aliasing]) fi regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq