Messages in this thread | | | From | Wolfgang Denk <> | Subject | Re: gcc-2.95 broken on PPC? | Date | Thu, 10 Apr 2003 23:20:50 +0200 |
| |
In message <3E95AF4F.20105@kegel.com> you wrote: > The Denkster wrote: > > > This is speculation only. We use gcc-2.95.4 as part of our ELDK in > > all of our projects, and a lot of people are using these tools, too. > > We definitely see more problems with gcc-3.x compilers. > > Hi Wolfgang, when you say you see more problems with gcc-3.x > compilers, what is x? I'd understand if you saw problems
There were serios problems with 3.0. I never tested 3.1. I believed 3.2 was OK, but I every now and then problems pop up that seem to be compiler related. Never found time to investigate, though.
> with gcc-3.0.*, but I had hoped that gcc-3.2.2 would compile > good kernels for ppc. > (Me, I'm still using Montavista Linux 2.0's gcc-2.95.3 to build my ppc kernels, > but am looking for an excuse to switch to gcc-3.2.* or gcc-3.3.*.)
I just heard that gdb 5.2.1 shows some problems when built with gcc 3.2 as sipped with RH-8.0, and the problem goes away when compiling with 2.95.[34]. The information might be wrong or a misinterpreta- tion, but I'm still suspicious.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
-- Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87 Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88 Email: wd@denx.de Why is an average signature file longer than an average Perl script?? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |