public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wayne.Brown@altec.com
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
Cc: npsimons@fsmlabs.com, garloff@suse.de, jamagallon@able.es,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-test10 ?
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 23:46:04 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8625698B.00200009.00@smtpnotes.altec.com> (raw)



I've been following this kgcc discussion with interest for weeks now and there's
one thing that still puzzles me.  Everyone on both sides of the issue seems to
be saying that kgcc (AKA egcs 1.1.2) is used because the gcc versions shipped by
several vendors don't compile the kernel correctly.  What I haven't seen yet is
an explanation of why kgcc can't be used for compiling *everything* and why
another compiler even needs to be installed.  I'm using egcs-1.1.2 with the
latest kernel, binutils, modutils, etc. as well as applications like the latest
ppp and setiathome with no problems.  Instead of using two compilers, why not
stay with the older version for everything and not use the latest gcc for
anything until both the kernel and userland stuff can be compiled with it?

I'm not trying to fan the flames, just wondering why there's such an apparent
rush to upgrade to a newer gcc.  Everyone seems to be taking it for granted that
an upgrade is needed, but there's disagreement on which version to use.  Why do
we need to upgrade the compiler at all right now?


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

             reply	other threads:[~2000-11-02  5:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2000-11-02  5:46 Wayne.Brown [this message]
2000-11-02  6:48 ` Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-test10 ? Jeff Garzik
2000-11-02 11:46 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-02 12:40 ` J . A . Magallon
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2000-11-02 20:53 Wayne.Brown
2000-11-01 22:40 J . A . Magallon
2000-11-01 22:53 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-02  1:12   ` Jeff Garzik
2000-11-02  2:47     ` J . A . Magallon
2000-11-02  3:26       ` Jeff Garzik
2000-11-02 11:40         ` Alan Cox
2000-11-01 22:57 ` Kurt Garloff
2000-11-01 22:47   ` David S. Miller
2000-11-01 22:45     ` Gérard Roudier
2000-11-01 23:07     ` Ben Pfaff
2000-11-01 23:12       ` David S. Miller
2000-11-01 23:11     ` Alan Cox
2000-11-01 23:15       ` Jeff Garzik
2000-11-01 23:21     ` Tom Rini
2000-11-01 23:30       ` Alan Cox
2000-11-01 23:36         ` Tom Rini
2000-11-02  0:22         ` Jeff Garzik
2000-11-02  4:50           ` Mike Galbraith
2000-11-02  4:59             ` Jeff Garzik
2000-11-01 23:37     ` Nathan Paul Simons
2000-11-01 23:29       ` David S. Miller
2000-11-01 23:54         ` Cort Dougan
2000-11-01 23:45           ` David S. Miller
2000-11-02  0:00             ` Cort Dougan
2000-11-02  0:54               ` Alan Cox
2000-11-02  0:21             ` Nathan Paul Simons
2000-11-02  0:11               ` David S. Miller
2000-11-02  0:32                 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-11-02  0:59                   ` Bill Nottingham
2000-11-02  2:42             ` Marc Lehmann
2000-11-02 21:24             ` Gérard Roudier
2000-11-02 22:37               ` David S. Miller
2000-11-02  6:28           ` Jakub Jelinek
2000-11-02  0:11         ` Nathan Paul Simons
2000-11-02  0:06           ` David S. Miller
2000-11-02  0:22           ` Tom Rini
2000-11-02  0:26           ` Jeff Garzik
2000-11-02  0:56           ` Alan Cox
2000-11-02  0:17     ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-11-02  0:30       ` Jeff Garzik
2000-11-02  1:01         ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-11-01 23:04   ` George
2000-11-02  1:08     ` Jan Dvorak
2000-11-01 23:12   ` Alan Cox

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=8625698B.00200009.00@smtpnotes.altec.com \
    --to=wayne.brown@altec.com \
    --cc=davem@redhat.com \
    --cc=garloff@suse.de \
    --cc=jamagallon@able.es \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=npsimons@fsmlabs.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox