| To: | daedalus@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: GCC 3.0 |
| From: | Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sun, 24 Jun 2001 12:01:02 -0500 |
| Cc: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Comments: | In-reply-to daedalus@xxxxxxxxxxx message dated "Sun, 24 Jun 2001 18:58:18 +0200." |
| References: | <01061905432702.09592@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <020d01c0f871$141afdc0$0a01a8c0@den2> <4.3.2.7.2.20010619085055.037b8a18@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <2d87jtgi85qrqfcc4k9upbg2bi8roapj1f@xxxxxxx> <ntobjtgfqcfcglg2le4nv25hkkskuun9hv@xxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2001 21:51:59 +0200, daedalus@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > >linux/kernel/timer.c > >linux/include/linux/sched.h > > Andrea Arcangeli had already answered to a question like mine on the > LKML and even before answering he had already put a patch at: > > ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/andrea/kernels/v2.4/2.4.6pre2aa2/00_gc > c-30-volatile-xtime-1 > > > Do you think it is worth to be merged into patch-2.4.x-xfs-1.0.x-core? I think we will keep the gcc 3.0 changes in the cvs tree, there are other core kernel changes on their way which fix varioug gcc 3.0 things. The cvs tree already being at 2.4.6-pre5 already has some of these. In releasing 1.0.1 we will be very conservative with the compilers we use. Steve |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: GCC 3.0, daedalus |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Access control lists, Juha Saarinen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: GCC 3.0, daedalus |
| Next by Thread: | *** Shrinking an XFS filesystem. ***, Arcadio A. Sincero Jr. |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |