This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [2.91.34] Compiling linux-2.0.34 ?



> 	I hate to poke another building-linux-with-egcs question on the
> list, but I am counting on this one being unique in one way. :)  Now that
> 2.0.34 is "officially" out, I'm wondering if anyone has appraised it's
> compatibility with egcs yet.  I am aware that the reasons for miscompiles
> in the 2.0 series are due to code problems in the kernel.  I'm wondering
> specifically if a.) these problems are fixed in 2.0.34, and b.) if not, is
> there a patch someplace that I can apply?

Alan Cox (who did most of the work on 2.0.34) said the following a while
back (on April 23):

> The situation is as follows
> 
> o       Linux 2.0.x builds correctly with gcc 2.7.2 (-1 and -3). 
> 
> o       Linux 2.1.x builds correctly with gcc 2.7.2, 2.8.1 and egcs (a few
>         errors keep popping up and people keep squashing them). 
> 
> I don't think there is anyone who doesn't intend 2.2.0 to work with 2.8.1
> and all the bugs people are finding now with gcc 2.8.1 are Linux not gcc
> bugs where the kernel forgot to stop gcc 2.8.1 optimising something we
> didnt want optimised, or from poor asm constraints on the linux code.
> 
> The problem is _nobody_ knows how many of those are still hiding in 2.0.x
> and introducing subtle races, so for safety we say build 2.0.x with 
> gcc-2.7.2-*.
> 
> So its an argument for what you build kernels with but its not an argument
> to which is the better compiler. Kernel code is just very touchy about
> such things.

In the absence of another statement from him, I think we need to say
that building 2.0.34 with egcs or gcc 2.8.x is not supported (even if,
as I suspect, a couple of the known bugs were fixed).


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]