Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 1 May 2008 15:33:49 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem |
| |
On Thu, 1 May 2008 15:27:26 -0700 (PDT) Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> 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. >
Drat. There go my alpha, i386, m68k, s390, sparc and powerpc cross-compilers. Vagard, save me!
Meanwhile I guess I can locally unpatch that patch.
| |