Re: gcc 3.1 fails to build Linux 2.4.7 kernel on i686-linux

["Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>]

On Sat, 16 Mar 2002, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> > Then how could the linux-2.4.0.tar.gz kernel source end up in the
> > release criteria of GCC-3.1 ?
> 
> I think that's a very bad choice.  Linux is know for abusing
> undocumented gcc features and having compiping an ancient kernel source
> tree as release criteria will never allow gcc to progress.
> 
> Having a _current_ kernel appear in the release criteria might make
> sense, and even that only with enough cooperation from us kernel folks.

2.4.0 is in the 3.1 criteria because they were copied from the 3.0
criteria, and the Release Manager and SC still need to overhaul them to
reflect current intent properly.  Note that the top of that page says:

   This document is still in its larval stage, and should not yet be
   taken as canonical. Most of the text is only a placeholder.

2.4.0 is in the 3.0 criteria because they had listed 2.2.14 (current
stable kernel when they were written), but once 2.4 was released it seemed
more appropriate than a 2.2 kernel to expect to compile with a new GCC.

In practice this part of the release criteria didn't seem to get applied
for 3.0 - there weren't any regular status reports before the release
collecting details of what worked on what platforms, and what needed to be
made to work before release, and Linux 2.4.x compilation with 3.0.y didn't
work until about 3.0.3.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk