[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANO7a6wePSgHvymXp8DbvNVe1NniLNjuYwtiDfJURCk5TffvzQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 10:24:58 +0530
From: Dhiru Kholia <dhiru.kholia@...il.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: clang builds are faster than gcc builds for --format=dominosec
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 3:27 AM, magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote:
> On 2012-06-26 23:53, Frank Dittrich wrote:
>> Finally, an interesting observation...
>> For linux-x86-64. the clang version is more than 30% faster than any gcc
>> build (at least with the gcc 4.6.3 that comes with fedora 16), for 32
>> bit linux-x86, clang builds are even more than 40% faster.
>>
>> A few other formats also profit from a clang build.
>
> What version of clang is this? I noticed my Ubuntu 12 clang is old
> enough not to support the -faddress-sanitizer
Get Clang 3.1 binaries from http://llvm.org/releases/download.html
I use Arch Linux and have Clang 3.1 which supports -faddress-sanitizer flag.
--
Cheers,
Dhiru
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.
