| To: | z@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [Announce] XFS 1.1 Prerelease 2 available for testing |
| From: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | 21 Mar 2002 14:04:35 -0600 |
| Cc: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <021301c1d111$a212b9f0$c801a8c0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.33.0203212147510.22191-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1016739950.30176.8.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <021301c1d111$a212b9f0$c801a8c0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Thu, 2002-03-21 at 13:50, z@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > | gcc-2.96-101 with good success. I think that 2.95.x is not so good. > > 2.95.x not so good? That's a little scary to me... > could you explain why you feel that way? > > | I _really_ hope that some day this question can go away. :) > > I'll second that... xfs exposed some bugs in the 2.95 series, there were reports of 2.95.2 miscompiling, 2.95.3 may be better... -Eric -- Eric Sandeen XFS for Linux http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs sandeen@xxxxxxx SGI, Inc. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: DMAPI dm_set_region, Dean Roehrich |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [Announce] XFS 1.1 Prerelease 2 available for testing, Mihai RUSU |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [Announce] XFS 1.1 Prerelease 2 available for testing, z |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Announce] XFS 1.1 Prerelease 2 available for testing, Mihai RUSU |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |