From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: fyi: gcc33-hammer crashes when compiling kvm emulate.c Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 19:01:43 +0200 Message-ID: <20101026170142.GD29961@basil.fritz.box> References: <20101026123828.GA30434@basil.fritz.box> <4CC70333.80400@zytor.com> <20101026163748.GB29961@basil.fritz.box> <4CC705ED.1020105@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Andi Kleen , kvm@vger.kernel.org, avi@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: "H. Peter Anvin" Return-path: Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:33871 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753073Ab0JZRBs (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Oct 2010 13:01:48 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4CC705ED.1020105@zytor.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > Not unless they are actively known to break. People get huffy about it Well they do -- i just found out. > because even if it is known to have problems it doesn't break *their* > particular configuration. I'm getting to be of the opinion that people > who compile modern kernels with ancient compilers and expect it to work > are suffering from some particular kind of insanity -- it's nothing the > distros do. The only exception are embedded people who compile with the > latest 3.4 gcc; they have explained they do so because newer gccs have > too many dependencies (the actual compiler, not the generated code) and > for speed. At least in the old days the main reason for gcc 3 was build speed. AKPM and some others used to be fond of that. 3.x is apparently much faster than 4.x -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.