xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Contradiction of "recommended compiler" in kernel-ML and XFS FAQ?

To: "Linux XFS Mailing List" <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Contradiction of "recommended compiler" in kernel-ML and XFS FAQ?
From: "Ralf G. R. Bergs" <rabe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 12:56:51 +0100
Cc: "Seth Mos" <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <4.3.2.7.2.20020128124020.034fc5e8@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: "Ralf G. R. Bergs" <rabe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 28 Jan 2002 12:43:39 +0100, Seth Mos wrote:

[...]
>>In the XFS FAQ it says "use egcs 1.1.2." But what if I would like to use 
>>recent
>>2.4.x kernels with XFS? I guess you don't want me to compile the XFS stuff 
>>with
>>egcs-1.1.2 and the rest of the kernel with gcc-2.95.3? ;-)
>
>Use egcs 1.1.2 for production systems. This is the most tested compiler 
>with XFS. This was because the early gcc-2.96 version was problematic. It's 
>a lot better nowadays and XFS is a bit more friendly to other  compilers 
>without eating your filesystem. But egcs 1.1.2 is still the most tested and 
>is what I still use for my production machines.

Ok, will do. Thanks for your comment.

Ralf


-- 
Verkaufe Original-BMW-Raeder:                    L I N U X       .~.
http://adsl-bergs.rz.rwth-aachen.de/~rabe       The  Choice      /V\
                                                 of a  GNU      /( )\
                                                Generation      ^^-^^



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