Re: gcc-2.95 broken on PPC?

Dan Kegel
2003-04-12T15:12:55Z

A high white horse souse wrote:
> I wouldn't switch to gcc-3.3 for now, the gcc mailing list looks like it
> has more problems and less features than the unstable bleeding edge
> gcc-3.4 CVS version. I am using gcc 3.2.2 for everything. I compiled
> my X, my libc, my kernel, my KDE. That is the first 3.x version that
> didn't produce incorrect code for any of these.

Thanks for the info. I feel a lot better about trying gcc-3.2.2 now.
Does anyone know if it needs patches to produce a working kernel
and glibc on sh4? gcc-3.0.4 needed a sizable patch on sh4, I seem to recall,
but not on ppc.

> The down side is that creating cross compilers from gcc 3.x is a lot
> harder unless you already have a cross compiled glibc from gcc 2.95.x
> in the proper paths.

Yep. I'm not looking forward to dealing with that. Shame the gcc
team keeps making building cross compilers harder.
- Dan

--
Dan Kegel