lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jun]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Isapnp warning
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@conectiva.com.br> wrote:
>
> Em Sat, Jun 21, 2003 at 08:41:02PM -0500, Chris Wedgwood escreveu:
> > On Sat, Jun 21, 2003 at 09:11:01PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> >
> > > Humm, I'd love to do that, i.e. to make gcc 3 required, lots of good
> > > stuff like this one, anonymous structs, etc, etc, lots of stuff
> > > could be done in an easier way, but are we ready to abandon gcc
> > > 2.95.*? Can anyone confirm if gcc 2.96 accepts this?
> >
> > What *requires* 2.96 still? Is it a large number of people or obscure
> > architecture?
>
> I don't know, I was just trying to figure out the impact of requiring gcc 3
> to compile the kernel. I never used gcc 2.96 btw.
>

Compared to 2.95.3, gcc-3.3 takes 1.5x as long to compile, and produces a
kernel which is 200k larger.

It is simply worthless.


-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:36    [W:0.170 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site