Hello,
On P, ÁPR 13, 2001 at 12:18:17 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> > gcc-2.95.3 is now the official latest stable compiler.
And the works for 2.95.4 is begun, no idea why. As gcc 3.0.0 said to arrive
in the first part of this year. Why we need an other 2.95.x? Wrong list I know.
> In terms of what we recommend for XFS, I think we're still sticking with
> egcs-2.91.66 - although we have had mixed reports of success with
> gcc-2.95.2 and gcc-2.95.3.
As far as I remember there were some problems with egcs, that´s why it is
abadonned (or something like that). Sure, 2.95.2 shows up with error on some
patches, and it has several problems with inside macro(?) creation. I never had
problems with 2.95.3 though. If you want, I can try out the patch with
2.95.4-cvs, but only with kernel 2.4.2, the deadlocks in 2.4.3 are not fixed
yet.
> [...] you might take a look at that to see other people's
> experiences if you feel like living on the edge. :)
If you trust in me, then use 2.95.3, but not 2.95.2.
Cheers!
|