Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 29 May 2004 07:42:41 -0700 | From | Dan Kegel <> | Subject | Re: Recommended compiler version |
| |
John B. wrote: > Quote from Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de>: >> Whether support for gcc 2.95 should be dropped is a discussion for 2.7. > > Is there any single 3.x.x version of GCC that's actively in use by a large > number of core developers? How do we make a sensible recommendation if not?
As an aside, it seems like gcc-3.3.3 is pretty good. There are some known problems with it, but the number is small. I haven't tried gcc-3.4.0 much yet, but I have seen a few kernel patches to fix issues 3.4.0 found in the kernel source.
I agree 2.6 should continue to support and compile correctly under gcc-2.95.3, even if that means working around compiler bugs. By the time linux-2.7 rolls around, I suspect nobody will mind if we drop 2.95.3 in favor of 3.4.x. It'll be interesting to see if newer gccs optimize the kernel better... - Dan
-- My technical stuff: http://kegel.com My politics: see http://www.misleader.org for examples of why I'm for regime change - 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/
| |