Re: Why isn't gcc-2.91.66 (egcs-1.1.2) packaged (for kernel 2.4 builds)
On Mar 15, 1:10pm, Christoph Martin wrote:
> Subject: Re: Why isn't gcc-2.91.66 (egcs-1.1.2) packaged (for kernel 2.4 b
> "J.H.M. Dassen (Ray)" <email@example.com> writes:
> > IMHO they're over-erring on the side of caution. I've been using 2.4.x-acy
> > kernels compiled with gcc 2.95.3 without any problems, as have many others.
> The kernel patch for SGIs xfs is only working with egcs-1.1.2.
This is no longer true...
--- Forwarded mail from Vladimir Vukicevic <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: gcc 2.95.2
From: Vladimir Vukicevic <email@example.com>
To: Per Andreas Buer <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 14 Mar 2001 15:56:30 -0500
On 14 Mar 2001 19:05:38 +0100, Per Andreas Buer wrote:
> Steve Lord <email@example.com> writes:
> > I cannot speak for 2.95.2,
> I can.
> The kernel, compiled from CVS 2001-03-04, compiled nicely. Basic testing
> ( 42 processes doing "cp /tmp/1 /tmp/2" and "sync") for just a few
> seconds resulted in the attached crash. With egcs-2.91.66 this kernel
> worked flawlessly.
The gcc that is currently in Debian testing/unstable, gcc version 2.95.3
20010125 (prerelease), works fine -- two of us here have been running
XFS kernels built with this gcc for a while now...
---End of forwarded mail from Vladimir Vukicevic <firstname.lastname@example.org>