From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 13:19:06 -0700 From: Tom Rini To: "Kevin B. Hendricks" Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org Subject: Re: can/should we use gcc 3.1 to compile kernels Message-ID: <20020607201906.GP14252@opus.bloom.county> References: <200206081337.31359.kevin.hendricks@sympatico.ca> <20020607193833.GO14252@opus.bloom.county> <200206071544.56448.kevin.hendricks@sympatico.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <200206071544.56448.kevin.hendricks@sympatico.ca> Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 03:44:56PM -0400, Kevin B. Hendricks wrote: > Not too bad warnings-wize excpet for the controlfb.c where it constanly > gave a funny warning about "pasting ->". Sounds right. I think there was a few other things too.. > It did this for every occurence of the macro CNTRL_REG which I must admit > has two ## which I think gcc was misinterpreting somehow. Well, isn't: #define x(foo) a_## foo ##_b A semi-common thing, like we do in indirect_pci.c ? Or was it something different? > Other than that just the occaissioanal wanring about unused variables and > things like that. Lots of the USB stuff uses __FUNCTION__ which gcc-3.1 isn't happy about. > I should have saved the build.log S'alright. -- Tom Rini (TR1265) http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/ ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/