From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264121AbTDJRjJ (for ); Thu, 10 Apr 2003 13:39:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264122AbTDJRjJ (for ); Thu, 10 Apr 2003 13:39:09 -0400 Received: from crack.them.org ([65.125.64.184]:57736 "EHLO crack.them.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264121AbTDJRjI (for ); Thu, 10 Apr 2003 13:39:08 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 13:50:33 -0400 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Dan Kegel Cc: wd@denx.de, Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: gcc-2.95 broken on PPC? Message-ID: <20030410175033.GA14969@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Dan Kegel , wd@denx.de, Linux Kernel Mailing List References: <3E95AF4F.20105@kegel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3E95AF4F.20105@kegel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 10:52:15AM -0700, Dan Kegel wrote: > The Denkster wrote: > >>However, bugs #1 (zlib.c) and #3 (div64.h) disappear if I compile > >>my kernels with gcc-3.2.2 instead of 2.95.4, which is a strong > >>indication that 2.95.4 is broken on PPC. Is this something that's > > > >This is speculation only. We use gcc-2.95.4 as part of our ELDK in > >all of our projects, and a lot of people are using these tools, too. > >We definitely see more problems with gcc-3.x compilers. > > Hi Wolfgang, when you say you see more problems with gcc-3.x > compilers, what is x? I'd understand if you saw problems > with gcc-3.0.*, but I had hoped that gcc-3.2.2 would compile > good kernels for ppc. > (Me, I'm still using Montavista Linux 2.0's gcc-2.95.3 to build my ppc > kernels, > but am looking for an excuse to switch to gcc-3.2.* or gcc-3.3.*.) > - Dan Both 3.2 and 3.3 are working well for us here. 3.2's received much better testing. I think we tripped up about four bugs in 3.2.2 that needed patches, but that's well below par compared to 2.95. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer