[Top] [All Lists]

Re: compile errors

To: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: compile errors
From: suzukis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 28 Apr 2000 01:58:47 +0900
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2000 01:58:47 +0900
Cc: ealonso@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: Andrew Park 's message of Thu, 27 Apr 2000 12:18:44 -0400 (EDT)<Pine.SOL.4.21.0004271205440.23546-100000@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
>Well, some may say that it is old, but gcc IS
>the official compiler of the linux Kernel.

Yes, the documentation in the official Linux kernel source
(Documentation/Changes) tells as "at least gcc-".
But I don't think the documentation does not push
gcc- than later. How do you think?

>I (IMHO) think it is rather stupid if XFS wouldn't compile
>with the official linux kernel compiler.

Of course, I agree enabling linux-xfs to be compiled
with gcc- is expected - but I don't think yet
it's not time for the linux-xfs core developpers to
check the back compatibilities. Today linux-xfs is
in bleeding-edge status, Possibly still there might
be bugs due to the implementation itself (SORRY!),
realized in any versions of gcc. For the core developpers
of SGI, now it's time to fix such bugs.

So, please don't ask the gcc-version-independency yet.
If you wish NOW - you (and me :-)) should do it.
But, keeping (at least) 1 environment similar to the
core developpers is not bad to find a bug, I think.
Don't you think so?


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>