xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: gcc-2.96-nn status

To: Alan Eldridge <alane@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: gcc-2.96-nn status
From: Seth Mos <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 19:27:00 +0200
Cc: SGI XFS Dev List <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20010918131920.A4284@wwweasel.geeksrus.net>
References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010918190751.03312448@pop.xs4all.nl> <20010918124051.A30647@wwweasel.geeksrus.net> <4.3.2.7.2.20010918190751.03312448@pop.xs4all.nl>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
At 13:19 18-9-2001 -0400, Alan Eldridge wrote:
On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 07:14:47PM +0200, Seth Mos wrote:
>At 12:40 18-9-2001 -0400, Alan Eldridge wrote:
>>I'm trying to configure my build system to make RPMS for one of our
>>comrades-in-XFS, and I've hit a big stumbling block.
>>
>>RedHat's RPMS now build with gcc-2.96-74 or higher. Kgcc is probably going
>>to go away (I can find out I think). But you can't build an athlon kernel
>>with kgcc.
>
>I can, altough it does not have as many optimizations. So I only think that
>the runtime speed would be affected. The linux kernel already knows what a
>Athlon processor is and what to do with it. I think this makes a larger
>difference then the compiler.
>

Umm, how? rpm --target athlon causes gcc to be invoked with -march=athlon,
which kgcc knows nothing about so it dies.

You can specify a target of i686 and have a kernel config for athlon/duron systems


--
Seth
Every program has two purposes one for which
it was written and another for which it wasn't
I use the last kind.


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