xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: C compiler...

To: Charles Shannon Hendrix <shannon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: C compiler...
From: Mike Baptiste <mike.baptiste@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 10:48:25 -0400
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Organization: Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University
References: <20020626145830.GB7973@widomaker.com>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.1a) Gecko/20020610
I've had trouble compiling 2.4.18 & XFS with anything less than 3.0.4 (ie 2.96), so I finally risked the switch. I've used 3.0.4 (XFS 1.0x) and now 3.1 (XFS 1.1) with no troubles on our main servers (RH 7.2 w/LVM) and on my laptop. Small set thats probably meaningless, I know, but so far, I'm very happy with it. But as always - YMMV

MB

Charles Shannon Hendrix wrote:
I note that the XFS patches suggest using egcs 2.91.66 to build
the kernel.  However, some new distributions (like Slackware) don't
even ship with that compiler any more.  While it's easy enough to get,
I believe the kernel is supposed to be stable on later releases now.

What are your feelings on using other versions of gcc for XFS builds?

What about GCC 3.1.latest?




--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Mike Baptiste            202 Hudson Hall, Box 90271, Durham, NC 27708
Director of Information Technology             mike.baptiste@xxxxxxxx
Pratt School of Engineering @ Duke University      Phone:919-660-5404
Download my Public GPG Key at http://duke.edu/~baptiste/mike.gpg



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: C compiler..., Mike Baptiste <=