Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 10 Aug 2003 01:15:54 +0300 | From | Ville Herva <> | Subject | Re: 2.4.22pre8 hangs too (Re: 2.4.21-jam1, aic7xxx-6.2.36: solid hangs) |
| |
On Sat, Aug 09, 2003 at 10:19:51PM +0200, you [Adrian Bunk] wrote: > On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 03:55:02PM +0300, Ville Herva wrote: > > > > Which brings me to the question: which gcc version is considered most stable > > for compiling 2.4.x these days? > >... > > This seems to suggest 2.96-85 would be more stable than gcc-3.2.1-2. Is this > > the case? > >... > > 2.95.3 and the (unofficial) 2.96 are the best compilers for 2.4 . > > In most cases 3.2.1 will give you a working kernel, but if you need > maximum stablity don't use gcc 3.x for compiling kernel 2.4 .
I'm surely aiming for stability, yeah ;).
2.96-85 produces a kernel that hangs (though it's not proven it's gcc's fault) -- the one compiled with gcc-3.2.1-2 hasn't hung yet. I guess I should at least use the latest errata version if I go with 2.96...
-- v --
v@iki.fi - 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/
| |