xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Conflicting Types Between .h and .c files

To: Danny Cox <DCox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Conflicting Types Between .h and .c files
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 20:43:46 +0100
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, XFS Mailing List <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <1029784293.1147.49.camel@wiley>; from DCox@SnapServer.com on Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 03:11:32PM -0400
References: <1029504550.1808.5.camel@wiley> <20020819194735.A32101@infradead.org> <1029783129.1147.37.camel@wiley> <20020819195641.A32415@infradead.org> <1029784293.1147.49.camel@wiley>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i
On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 03:11:32PM -0400, Danny Cox wrote:
> Christoph,
> 
> On Mon, 2002-08-19 at 14:56, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 02:52:08PM -0400, Danny Cox wrote:
> > > > I don't think that's valid.  And at least gcc 3.2 doesn't complain..
> > > 
> > >   Yes, but 2.96 does.  I'd think that several folks use 2.96, since
> > > that's the standard gcc from RH 7.2.
> > 
> > Gcc '2.96' is a development snapshot.  Even if redhat ships it it's by
> > now ways official.
> 
>       Okay, one more try, and I'll admit defeat, and shut up:
> 
>       "Official" or not, many folks who use XFS will compile it with gcc
> 2.96, because that's the version they get by default.  They must make
> the changes if they wish to acutally *use* XFS.  Even given that it's a
> simple change, I doubt that a non-C-programmer can do it.

But it does work with redhat's latest release compilers (7.1/7.2 errata, 7.3).
So please upgrade to those, older compilers are known to produce buggy code
in combination with XFS anyway.


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