From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263895AbTJ1JXN (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2003 04:23:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263897AbTJ1JXM (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2003 04:23:12 -0500 Received: from gprs197-51.eurotel.cz ([160.218.197.51]:61826 "EHLO amd.ucw.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263895AbTJ1JXM (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2003 04:23:12 -0500 Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 10:20:27 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Andi Kleen Cc: John Levon , Jeff Garzik , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [AMD64 1/3] fix C99-style declarations Message-ID: <20031028092026.GA1167@elf.ucw.cz> References: <20031025182824.GA12117@gtf.org> <20031025202750.GC27754@wotan.suse.de> <20031025204717.GA78345@compsoc.man.ac.uk> <20031025205617.GD27754@wotan.suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031025205617.GD27754@wotan.suse.de> X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > > This has happened more than once in the tree. > > > > When all the architectures have a minimum gcc requirement that accepts > > mixed code and declarations by default, it can be removed ... > > Would be my prefered solution. Discourage 2.95. > > Sooner or later we have to do that anyways when a bug in 2.95 > is found that breaks code (has happened with all gccs so far). > Sooner would be better, as supporting 2.95 seems to be already > a significant mainteance burden. Well.. except that 2.95 is still two times faster than gcc 3.3 :-(. Pavel -- When do you have a heart between your knees? [Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]