Pavel Machek wrote: > Would it be possible to keep 2.7.2.3? You still need 2.7.2.3 to > reliably compile 2.0.X (and maybe even 2.2.all-but-latest?). What fails, when you use egcs-1.1.2 to build 2.0.x or early 2.2.x? Maybe they need -fno-strict-aliasing... is that what you are referring to? Regards, Jeff -- Jeff Garzik | "Mind if I drive?" -Sam Building 1024 | "Not if you don't mind me clawing at the MandrakeSoft | dash and screaming like a cheerleader." | -Max - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- [patch] kernel/module.c (plus gratuitous rant) Andrew Morton
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (plus gratuitous r... Linus Torvalds
- [PATCH] 2.4 Changes update (was Re: [patch... Barry K. Nathan
- Re: [PATCH] 2.4 Changes update (was Re... Andrew Morton
- Re: [PATCH] 2.4 Changes update (wa... Marcus Sundberg
- Re: [PATCH] 2.4 Changes update (wa... Paul Gortmaker
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (plus gratuito... Andrew Morton
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (plus gratuito... Pavel Machek
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (plus grat... Jeff Garzik
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (plus grat... Alan Cox
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (plus grat... Keith Owens
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (plus ... Richard Henderson
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (... Peter Samuelson
- Re: [patch] kernel/module... Richard Henderson
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (plus ... Rusty Russell
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (... Peter Samuelson
- Recommended compiler? - R... Linux Kernel Developer
- Re: Recommended compi... Peter Samuelson