Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) id g0TJ0DC19280 for linux-xfs-outgoing; Tue, 29 Jan 2002 11:00:13 -0800 Received: from chef.cc.absoval.com (cpe-66-1-218-101.fl.sprintbbd.net [66.1.218.101]) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) with SMTP id g0TJ06P19258 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2002 11:00:06 -0800 Received: from ieee.org (bs@thebs.cc.absoval.com [192.168.100.89]) by chef.cc.absoval.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA01762; Tue, 29 Jan 2002 12:59:53 -0500 Message-ID: <3C56E322.5DFE92C2@ieee.org> Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 13:00:02 -0500 From: "Bryan J. Smith" Organization: SmithConcepts/AbsoluteValueSystems X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.18pre21 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vincent Bernat , linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: Which gcc? -- 2.91.66, 2.95.x, 2.96, 3.0x References: <200201291638.g0TGcZ2t003428@scare.vieo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk Status: O Content-Length: 1969 Lines: 49 Vincent Bernat wrote: > Hello ! > It seems that the official gcc for the kernel is now 2.95.3 : http://www.atnf.csiro.au/~rgooch/linux/docs/kernel-newsflash.html/ > However, on lkml, some people seem to prefer 2.96 from Redhat > (latest version). And the XFS project seems to recommend > egcs-1.1.2. > 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 with *NO*PROBLEMS*. 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 7.x. 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. -- Bryan P.S. Please correct any inaccurate statements above. -- Bryan J. Smith, Engineer mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org 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.