[lkml]   [2004]   [Jan]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: gcc 2.95.3
On Fri, 2004-01-23 at 10:30, Karel Kulhavý wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 05:01:23PM +0100, Daniel Andersen wrote:
> > > I read here "make sure you have gcc 2.95.3 available" - does it mean
> > > my gcc-3.2.3 or gcc-3.2.2 is not suitable for kernel compiling?
> >
> > Please have a look at
> What if the kernel compiles cleanly but the generated code is invalid?
> Or is gcc-3.2.2 BugFree(TM) (BugFree as in BugFree speech, not as
> in BugFree beer)?

Many people have been using gcc-3.2 or later to build kernels, and I
haven't really heard of any problems with this, at least on i386. I
personally have used 3.2.2 and 3.3.2 (well, with Debian's patches) and
haven't had any weirdness with 2.6 or 2.4. ISTR there being arches that
need 3.x to compile, but I could be mistaken.

2.95.3 is definitely the *oldest* compiler you'd want to use, and pretty
much skip between that and 3.2.

[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:00    [W:0.148 / U:0.524 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site