> I've been complaining incessantly about Linux 2.1.111-2.1.116, so finally
> I get to report the good news that 2.1.117, compiled with egcs-19980816,
> has been running now for the last few hours. 2.1.116 wouldn't last more
> then a few minutes. This is an improvement.
>
> So, I guess the problem was a kernel problem, and went away with 117.
> I get to report that egcs correctly built my Linux/alpha kernel.
I would like to say something about egcs.
I am using egcs me too and for a long time now. I have _never_ had
problems with egcs.
Of course I try to reduce the likelihood of egcs bugs that can render the
kernel unstable.
Every time I get a snapshot, I 'make bootstrap' to compile, recompile and
compare: just to be sure the compiler _seems_ okay to itself.
Then I run its tests: 'make check'.
Here the rule is: if it pass _all_ the gcc tests: without unexpected
errors (the suite reports all the errors and passes) and pass _all_ the
library tests then I install the compiler. I don't care about g77 and g++
since I don't really need them. Oh .. and I am aware that these rules
could not be enought to be sure to have a good compiler.
Using these rules, my actual egcs is the 980315 snapshot and it runs well.
No problems at all with _any_ kernels. 2.1.116 was quite stable compiled
with egcs (the version I use): no problems and when I've got the 117, 116
compiled the 117 and lasted until reboot ... so I don't understand your
point that the 116 should have a bug that went away in 117.
Now just a question: do you run at least 'make check' before installing a
new egcs snapshot ?
Ciao,
Riccardo.
-
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.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html