Linux/PPC BitKeeper tree announcements

Linux/PPC BitKeeper tree announcements

[Cort Dougan]

We now have a mailing list for the commit messages for the 2.2 and 2.4
trees.  If you want to keep up on Linux/PPC development take a look at
http://www.fsmlabs.com/linuxppcbk.html and follow the subscription
instructions.

I'd like to keep the traffic low on these lists since we have plenty of
other lists for general discussion.  This lists are just for following
changes to the kernel and some discussion of those changes.

The 2.3 trees are no longer available via anonymous access as they're been
replaced with a new 2.4 repository.  The change was necessary to remove the
80MB or so of deleted file (as a result cloning, checking out and committing
changes is much faster).

For those of you who had work in copies of the 2_3 that you were accessing
anonymously you need not fear your work is lost.  Just generate a diff
against the last changeset in your repository and reapply it to the 2_4
tree.

** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Linux/PPC BitKeeper tree announcements

[iweiny]

At the risk of sounding stupid I guess I need a newer compiler than egcs for
the new kernel trees?

fork.c:353: fixed or forbidden register 68 (0) was spilled for class CR0_REGS.
This may be due to a compiler bug or to impossible asm
statements or clauses.

Ira

--- To quote Cort Dougan: ---
>
>
> We now have a mailing list for the commit messages for the 2.2 and 2.4
> trees.  If you want to keep up on Linux/PPC development take a look at
> http://www.fsmlabs.com/linuxppcbk.html and follow the subscription
> instructions.
>
> I'd like to keep the traffic low on these lists since we have plenty of
> other lists for general discussion.  This lists are just for following
> changes to the kernel and some discussion of those changes.
>
> The 2.3 trees are no longer available via anonymous access as they're been
> replaced with a new 2.4 repository.  The change was necessary to remove the
> 80MB or so of deleted file (as a result cloning, checking out and committing
> changes is much faster).
>
> For those of you who had work in copies of the 2_3 that you were accessing
> anonymously you need not fear your work is lost.  Just generate a diff
> against the last changeset in your repository and reapply it to the 2_4
> tree.
>
>


** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Linux/PPC BitKeeper tree announcements

[Franz Sirl]

At 02:50 2001-01-19, iweiny@pacbell.net wrote:

>At the risk of sounding stupid I guess I need a newer compiler than egcs for
>the new kernel trees?
>
>fork.c:353: fixed or forbidden register 68 (0) was spilled for class CR0_REGS.
>This may be due to a compiler bug or to impossible asm
>statements or clauses.

You shouldn't be using _anything_ older than gcc-2.95.2 on PPC anymore. In
the meantime the release of gcc-2.95.3 is pending and I would _strongly_
recommend you to use it.
You can find the latest RPM's on
<ftp://devel.linuxppc.org/users/fsirl/glibc-2.1/>, the current revision is
2t, which corresponds to gcc-2.95.3.test2.

Minimum download are the cpp and gcc packages, for C++ you need gcc-c++ and
libstdc++ packages as well.

Franz.


** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Linux/PPC BitKeeper tree announcements

[Kenneth Johansson]

Franz Sirl wrote:
>
> At 02:50 2001-01-19, iweiny@pacbell.net wrote:
>
> >At the risk of sounding stupid I guess I need a newer compiler than egcs for
> >the new kernel trees?
> >
> >fork.c:353: fixed or forbidden register 68 (0) was spilled for class CR0_REGS.
> >This may be due to a compiler bug or to impossible asm
> >statements or clauses.
>
> You shouldn't be using _anything_ older than gcc-2.95.2 on PPC anymore. In
> the meantime the release of gcc-2.95.3 is pending and I would _strongly_
> recommend you to use it.

Why do you so strongly recommend using it?

** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/