[2.4.10] README and Documentation/Changes inconsistent

[2.4.10] README and Documentation/Changes inconsistent

[Florian Weimer]

These files state different C compiler requirements.  Which one is
correct?

-- 
Florian Weimer 	                  Florian.Weimer@RUS.Uni-Stuttgart.DE
University of Stuttgart           http://cert.uni-stuttgart.de/
RUS-CERT                          +49-711-685-5973/fax +49-711-685-5898

Re: [2.4.10] README and Documentation/Changes inconsistent

[Alan Cox]

> These files state different C compiler requirements.  Which one is
> correct?

gcc 2.95.[3,4] is probably the compiler of choice

Re: [2.4.10] README and Documentation/Changes inconsistent

[D. Stimits]

Alan Cox wrote:
> 
> > These files state different C compiler requirements.  Which one is
> > correct?
> 
> gcc 2.95.[3,4] is probably the compiler of choice

My first attempt at this question didn't seem to make it in. On RH 7.1,
which has kgcc (2.91.66) and gcc 2.96, will it be necessary to install a
third compiler for stable 2.4.10+ compiles? Can kgcc still work for
this? I'm one of the people running XFS filesystem, and the XFS code
works well with kgcc, but it makes me nervous to think about using
anything else with XFS kernels. I would be greatly relieved if 2.91.66
remains useable throughout the 2.4.x series.

D. Stimits, stimits@idcomm.com

> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [2.4.10] README and Documentation/Changes inconsistent

[=?unknown-8bit?B?RnLpZOlyaWMgTC4gVy4=?= Meunier]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=unknown-8bit, Size: 794 bytes --]

D. Stimits wrote:

> My first attempt at this question didn't seem to make it in.
> On RH 7.1, which has kgcc (2.91.66) and gcc 2.96, will it be
> necessary to install a third compiler for stable 2.4.10+
> compiles?

AFAIK not for 2.4.

> Can kgcc still work for this?

If kgcc = egcs 1.1.2, I suppose so. I compiled 2.4.10 and all
earlier 2.4 with it.

Anyway, I compiled 2.95.4 right now and 2.4.11 will use it.
Time to remove egcs. Maybe it's the recommended compiler for
2.2 (?), but I don't intend to downgrade.

BTW, these files don't say that 2.95.4 is from CVS and not a
final release.

If you have the 2.95.3 sources, then

cvs rdiff -u -r gcc-2_95_3 -r gcc-2_95-branch gcc > gcc-2.95.4.patch

is your friend.

-- 
0@pervalidus.{net, {dyndns.}org} Tel: 55-21-2717-2399 (Niterói-RJ BR)