lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Sep]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 05:42:59PM +0200, Mads Martin Joergensen wrote:
> * Timur Tabi <ttabi@interactivesi.com> [Sep 26. 2000 17:36]:
> > > Maybe this can be fixed for 2.96, but it breaks badly elsewhere (doesn't
> > > compile; kernel builds but hangs/crashes at boot; kernel appears to work
> > > fine while it is busy eating your disk; ...)
> >
> > Why is 2.96 so screwed up? I mean, the version numbers imply that 2.96 is a
> > minor bugfix over 2.95, but your comments make it sound like it's a major
> > change.
>
> Maybe because gcc 2.96 have not been released yet, and therefore not is
> bugfree yet?

Have you actually seen a bugfree compiler? I don't expect to ever seen any.
Anyway, this is more about 2.2 kernels relying on certain things which 2.96
might no longer guarantee because of some optimizations. E.g. 2.96 compiled
2.4.0-testx kernels work pretty well on ia32, sparc64, alpha and ia64 AFAIK.

Jakub
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:38    [W:0.133 / U:1.168 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site