Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 1 May 2008 19:55:58 -0400 | From | Chris Knadle <> | Subject | Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem |
| |
On Thu, 1 May 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, 1 May 2008, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > > I see only the following choices: > > > - remove __weak and replace all current usages > > > - move all __weak functions into own files, and ensure that also happens > > > for future usages > > > - #error for gcc 4.1.{0,1} > > > > Can we detect the {0,1}? __GNUC_EVEN_MORE_MINOR__? > > It's __GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__, I believe. > > So yes, we can distinguish 4.1.2 (good, and very common) from 4.1.{0,1} > (bad, and rather uncommon). > And yes, considering that 4.1.1 (and even more so 4.1.0) should be rare to > begin with, I think it's better to just not support it. > > Linus
Unfortunately Debian Stable (i.e. Etch), which is relatively popular for server use, is still using 4.1.1 :-( (The current gcc package is gcc-4.1.1-21)
I have not looked to see if Debian Stable's gcc-4.1.1-21 has been patched for the currently discussed __weak bug.
-- Chris
Chris Knadle Chris.Knadle@coredump.us
| |