Vincent Bernat wrote:
> Hello !
> It seems that the official gcc for the kernel is now 2.95.3 :
> However, on lkml, some people seem to prefer 2.96 from Redhat
> (latest version). And the XFS project seems to recommend
> WHat is the best choice now ? egcs, 2.95.3 or 2.96 from Redhat ?
"Bryan J. Smith" wrote:
[ I believe egcs-1.1.2 = gcc 2.91.66 ]
I know RedHat is compiling its kernels with 2.96, although it did
use the "kgcc" wrapper to 2.91.66 in RedHat 7.0. Most other
distros are using 2.95.3, although a few _ignorant_ ones
*COUGH*Mandrake*COUGH* were using the "not recommended" 2.95.4.
SGI and a number of others have stuck with 2.91.66 period.
All I know is that I run RedHat and have compiled mine with 2.91.66
RedHat Rawhide kernels are now being compiled with gcc 3.0x (3.02?)
as RedHat 8.0 enters alpha-testing. GCC 2.96 was actually a
"private designation" of the GCC 3.0x development branch in CVS,
which RedHat used. The Cygnus/gcc team then "post-designated" the
3.0x development branch in CVS to 2.97 to differentiate from RedHat
So 2.96 and 3.0x release actually have a lot more in common than
2.91 and 2.95.x. If anything, 3.0x should be considered a more
"backward compatible/complete" version of what 2.96 is. RedHat
moved to the 3.0x development branch early because it needed
Itanium and other support, hence 2.96.
I, for one, am glad to see the GCC 2.96 bastard go. I hope we all
get to 3.0x shortly.
P.S. Please correct any inaccurate statements above.
Bryan J. Smith, Engineer mailto:b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx
AbsoluteValue Systems, Inc. http://www.linux-wlan.org
SmithConcepts, Inc. http://www.SmithConcepts.com
1999 IRS Data: The top 1% of income earners pay over 36%
of the taxes, but have less than 20% of the total income.