This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: *** bootstrap fails for 3.4.0 20040113 (experimental) oni586-suse-linux-gnu
- From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>
- To: Robert Schiele <rschiele at uni-mannheim dot de>,Dan Kegel <dank at kegel dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 00:27:05 +0100 (CET)
- Subject: Re: *** bootstrap fails for 3.4.0 20040113 (experimental) oni586-suse-linux-gnu
- References: <53734.66.201.44.163.1074147610.squirrel@webmail.pair.com><20040116143158.GB32753@schiele.dyndns.org> <4008050A.4040305@kegel.com>
On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, Robert Schiele wrote:
> Well, this technical solution would not really solve the problem. It would
> still be possible that some vendor specific patch in my binutils, a hardware
> bug, or cosmic radiation might cause a failure. And the same people would
> again be annoyed.
Personally, I wouldn't worry, or, more precisely: I believe the vallue of
your automatic tester and its failure reports is much higher than keeping
a few people non-annoyed (especially when they could easily filter your
reports).
On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, Dan Kegel wrote:
> Then stop using a vendor-supplied binutils -- would a vanilla one really
> be hard to install? I rather doubt hardware bugs or cosmic radiation
> will be a problem.
What's wrong with vendor supplied binutils? All Linux distributions I
just checked use them, and I doubt that (like with GCC) anyone is really
using vanilla binutils in a distribution, so Robert's tests are in fact
quite real world.
Gerald