Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 4 Feb 1998 11:01:17 +0100 (MET) | From | Gabriel Paubert <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.0.3x & gcc 2.8 |
| |
On Wed, 4 Feb 1998, Philip Blundell wrote:
> >No, you have to convince Alan Cox, that it should. Seems he doesn't like > >to fix anything for gcc-280. > > If you can get people to run kernels with gcc 2.8.0 and this patch for a few > weeks and convince everyone that nothing breaks, it can probably go into > 2.0.34. Putting it in otherwise is implicitly saying "gcc 2.8.0 is ok", and > that's a dangerous thing to do. >
gcc-2.8.0 will break at least 3 network drivers. I've already published patches for it. But given the large (about 3) number of people who are using them, I would not go for inclusion right now. I've only got success reports, though ;)
And the same problem which is hidden by gcc-2.7 (bad or insufficiently tight constraints in asm statements) might pop up in other places. I did indeed perform a search and found a few places where it could bite, depending on compiler options like optimization level, CPU type...
Gabriel.
| |