On Mon, 14 Feb 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > that it'd probably compile with kgcc-2.7.2.3 (although breaking in some
> > other part), but it's to illustrate that NO vanilla 2.2.xx kernel is
> > compileable outta the box...
>
> I don't care if it doesnt build with gcc 2.95. I keep telling people this.
> It seems to work with 2.95 now except for a few odd driver bits.
Please, do return to the ground. kgcc-2.7.2.3 is dead long ago. As well as
libc-4.something...
> > People !!! It's already 15th release candidate (less for all that pre's and
> > ac's) and it does NOT even compile... "Use kgcc-2.7.2.3" is NOT to be taken
> > as a valid excuse, it's simply broken... There have been patches addressing
> > wrong assembly in 2.2.xx in l-k but nobody cared to merge them.
>
> Most of the asm fixes have been merged after they have been checked by gcc
> folks I trust. And 2.2.14 is still the first kernel that is likely to work
> vaguely reliable with gcc 2.9.5. Fundamental things like FPU emulation don't
> build right in earlier kernels
This very breakage has been fixed by the patches sent to the l-k several
times. Don't tell me that noone did notice them. This kind of error is a
strait ILLEGAL asm programming described in detail in gcc FAQ.
===========================================================================
Sergey Kubushin aka the Tamer < > The impossible we do immediately.
e-mail: ksi@ksi-linux.com SK320-RIPE < > Miracles require 24-hour notice.
===========================================================================
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 15 2000 - 21:00:27 EST