On Thu, 7 Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >I've been using gcc-2.95.3-0.20000517 for some time and before that 2.95-2
>> >with nothing more than a few snide remarks here to unsettle me.
>>
>> Jeepers creepers... ;o)
>>
>> This is one of the biggest FAQ's I think in all of Linux
>> land... People argue about how they use compiler XXX.YYY and it
>> works for them, so it should work for everyone, when Linus, and
>> Alan Cox, and others explicitly state that gcc2.95 and other
>> compilers are buggy and/or the kernel has bugs that make kernel
>> builds with these compilers break.
>>
>
>Sorry to contradict you.
Sorry to correct you...
>Alan Cox has stated in this list that what precluded use of gcc 2.95.2
>was kernel bugs not compiler bugs. AFAIK they have been fixed in
>2.2.16. And AFAIK Suse, Caldera and Mandrake have switched to gcc
Quoting my above message once again:
>> Alan Cox, and others explicitly state that gcc2.95 and other
>> compilers are buggy and/or the kernel has bugs that make
See that? I said gcc2.95 and other compilers (meaning various
versions of gcc/egcs) are either buggy "and/or" the kernel has
bugs. In other words, depending on the kernel version, and gcc
version you use, you can and will have problems. Some
combinations it is the kernel's fault and others it is gcc's
fault. It depends on the combination.
The official compiler for 2.2.x is "gcc 2.7.2.3" which is all
that is guaranteed to work. _anything_ else is a dice
roll. That is the official word from Linus and friends, and
nonetheless people continue to second guess it and "AFAIK" it to
death.
The official compiler for 2.3.x/2.4.x is officially 2.7.2.3 as
well.
Here is from the 2.4.0-test7 "Changes" file:
Kernel compilation
==================
GCC
---
You will need at least gcc 2.7.2 to compile the kernel. You currently
have several options for gcc-derived compilers: gcc 2.7.2.3, various
versions of egcs, the new gcc 2.95 and upcoming gcc 3.0, and experimental
compilers like pgcc. For absolute stability, it is still recommended
that gcc 2.7.2.3 be used to compile your kernel. egcs 1.1.2 should also
work. gcc 2.95 is known to have problems, and using pgcc for your kernel
is just asking for trouble.
The point is, using gcc 2.95 will result in a good chance of a
fsck'd kernel. Doesn't make a lick of difference wether it is
the kernel's fault or the compiler. If you have a useless
kernel, then you have a useless kernel.
>2.95.2. Also it is gcc 2.95.2 who is the _approved_ compiler for
>compiling glibc not egcs or gcc 2.7.2.8
What does this have to do with kernel compilation? glibc is not
used in the kernel. I didn't say a thing about glibc at
all. gcc 2.95 might be a fine compiler for compiling all sorts
of things, but the kernel isn't one of them. Again, it doesn't
matter who/what/where/when/why is at fault.
Don't use 2.95 for compiling kernels, or else tread water if you
do.
TTYL
--
Mike A. Harris | Computer Consultant | Capslock Consulting
Linux Advocate | Open Source Advocate | Red Hat Linux Fanatic
Red Hat Linux: http://www.redhat.com
Download for free: ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/redhat-6.2/
_______________________________________________
Redhat-devel-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-devel-list
