Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2012 16:35:41 +0100
From: magnum <>
Subject: Re: gcc versions

On 01/05/2012 04:20 PM, Solar Designer wrote:
 > On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 03:56:16PM +0400, Solar Designer wrote:
 >> The 4.4.0 vs. 4.4.6 difference is curious.  I may need to make more
 >> 4.4.x builds.
 > So the change was between 4.4.4 and 4.4.5:

Great! So it seems we should use 1-1-1 for any version of gcc older than 
4.4.5. I presume there is a macro for the third digit.

I'm still curious to know at what gcc version we would have to disable 
intrinsics completely. Maybe we should still do it for <4.0?

I'm pretty sure we can assume 1-1-1 for 32-bit < 4.4.5 too even if 
untested. I do not think I have ever seen a 32-bit build getting a 
higher best para than 64-bit for a specific version.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.