From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30298 invoked by alias); 3 May 2010 22:01:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 26038 invoked by uid 48); 3 May 2010 22:01:23 -0000 Date: Mon, 03 May 2010 22:01:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100503220123.26037.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug target/43729] Mach-O LTO support needed for darwin In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-05/txt/msg00243.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #38 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-05-03 22:01 ------- Mike, I was more interested about the second option since you seem to indicate that the first option would pessimize the the LTO code generation on i386 darwin. Or did I misunderstand that comment? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43729