Re: Still cannot compile

2001-04-17 Thread Alan Cox
> "Alan Cox wrote:" > > > But we _do need_ a working current-kernel. > > > > Use gcc 2.95/2.96 > > Is 2.91.66 already obsolete ? > Documentation/Changes does not suggest this ... Its 'temporarily not working'. The rwsem stuff needs cleaning up or ifdeffing a bit to handle egcs thats all - To un

Re: Still cannot compile

2001-04-17 Thread Andrzej Krzysztofowicz
"Alan Cox wrote:" > > But we _do need_ a working current-kernel. > > Use gcc 2.95/2.96 Is 2.91.66 already obsolete ? Documentation/Changes does not suggest this ... Andrzej -- === Andrzej M. Krzysztofowicz [EMA

Re: Still cannot compile

2001-04-16 Thread Alan Cox
> gcc-3.0-pre-2001-04-08. > I will test with today's or tomorrow's gcc-snapshot when I'll get the > time but > I'm at work at the moment and this does cope more than "just the > kernel". > But we _do need_ a working current-kernel. Use gcc 2.95/2.96 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the lin

Re: Still cannot compile, 2.4.3-ac6

2001-04-14 Thread John Jasen
On Sun, 15 Apr 2001, Marko Kreen wrote: > Sorry. Who said it should not be tested? How else it could get > 'default compiler'? If the gcc-3.0 would start giving errors > on some old code then it could be gcc bug. But this rwsem code > is couple of days old. It is good to let it through stric

Re: Still cannot compile, 2.4.3-ac6

2001-04-14 Thread Marko Kreen
On Sun, Apr 15, 2001 at 01:03:35AM +0300, Matti Aarnio wrote: > On Sat, Apr 14, 2001 at 09:09:00PM +, Thorsten Glaser Geuer wrote: > > Dear Sirs, > > I still cannot compile with gcc-3.0 from 08.04. > > Yes ? Who said gcc-3.0 is suitable compiler ? > > No doubt it some day will b

Re: Still cannot compile, 2.4.3-ac6

2001-04-14 Thread Matti Aarnio
On Sat, Apr 14, 2001 at 09:09:00PM +, Thorsten Glaser Geuer wrote: > Dear Sirs, > I still cannot compile with gcc-3.0 from 08.04. Yes ? Who said gcc-3.0 is suitable compiler ? No doubt it some day will be the default compiler, but not yet. For that matter, what "gcc