Re: lynx-dev dev.18 patch: USE_PRETTYSRC, lynx.cfg

[Doug Kaufman]

On Sat, 15 Jan 2000, Leonid Pauzner wrote:

> Well, now I think -O1 would be a compromize (it does have a difference
> over the case without -O at all). Tom, please made respective changes,
> I also tweak INSTALLATION file.

As far as I can tell from the gcc info files, there is no "O1" flag.
There is "-O" and "-O2". "-O3" generally is of no benefit under DJGPP
and sometimes gives inferior performance (according to messages
from the usual experts in comp.os.msdos.djgpp). I would be in favor
of leaving the makefile optimized at "-O2". Anyone having trouble
compiling can always decrease optimization. That seems more reasonable
to me than leaving the standard makefile without full optimization.
  
> -    If using DJGPP 2.02 and GCC 2.8.1, you may not need to "stubedit"
> -    cc1.exe if you use -O2 optimization, since cc1.exe comes with
> -    a 1536K stack. To compile with -O3 optimization, the stub
> -    needs to be edited to give a larger stack. To do this go into
> -    djgpp\lib\gcc-lib\djgpp\2.81 and either type the command:
> +    the C compiler and its libraries (see readme.1st from DJGPP 
> distribution).

I know that this is in the current file, but is it really true that
you can compile with -O2 without enlarging the stack? I would have
to go back to the default stack on my system to check this. My
recollection is that the stack is larger, but so is the requirement. I
think I had to enlarge the stack when I switched to 2.8.1, but I can't
remember if that was with -O2 or -O3


The current versions are DJGPP 2.03 and GCC 2.95.2. I haven't updated
yet, but if we update the INSTALLATION file, we should probably make
it current. Has anyone tested 2.03 with 2.95.2 to see what changes in
stack and buffer are really necessary to compile lynx for DOS with
various optimization levels?
                       Doug

__ 
Doug Kaufman
Internet: address@hidden