On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 11:01:45PM -0400, Kurt Wall wrote: > On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 12:26:07AM +0200, Adrian Bunk took 109 lines to write: > > This patch removes support for gcc < 3.2 . > > > > The advantages are: > > - reducing the number of supported gcc versions from 8 to 4 [1] > > allows the removal of several #ifdef's and workarounds > > - my impression is that the older compilers are only rarely > > used, so miscompilations of a driver with an old gcc might > > not be detected for a longer amount of time > > > > My personal opinion about the time and space a compilation requires is > > that this is no longer that much of a problem for modern hardware, and > > in the worst case you can compile the kernels for older machines on more > > recent machines. > > Environments that require kernel compilation, often multiple times, > testing, benefit from shorter compile times. It can be the difference > between, say, completing a test suite overnight instead of having to > wait until tomorrow afternoon. Keeping 2.95, at least, has some value > in such environments.
I *do* still use 2.95 a lot, and I'm not alone, judging from people around me. 2.95 has been the reference for a very long time, that's why it's still so much present. 3.0 and 3.1 (even 3.2) have been there for a very short time frame, but 2.95 and 3.3 really seem to be references compilers. So please keep support for 2.95. Cheers, Willy - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
