xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: redhat 7.1

To: "'Martin Stricker'" <shugal@xxxxxx>, <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: redhat 7.1
From: "Juha Saarinen" <juha@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 12:53:44 +1200
Importance: Normal
In-reply-to: <3B16DFA0.AEFA4C50@xxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
:: Not the compiler is broken but the source code! See
:: http://www.bero.org/gcc296.html for more information. After 
:: a close look
:: of some of my own source and contemplating about Beros comments I
:: finally got to the conclusion Red Hat did a Good Thing (TM) 
:: deciding to
:: use gcc 2.96-RH. But decide yourself. It may take *some* 
:: fixing in the
:: XFS code but after that you're standards compliant, so your 
:: code should
:: work with any compiler (that is, if that compilers is ANSI C 
:: compliant!
:: Not all are...)

Yeah, I think too that Bero's arguments are convincing, but then I'm the
last person in the world to offer any kind of expert opinion on it,
so... 

Is there a "code linter" that would pick up constructs that might create
problems? Steve Lord did say that the issue was caused by old code
inherited from IRIX/XFS, so it might be a good idea to look at it.

-- Juha


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