People here seem to assume that just because gcc 2.7.x compiles
the 2.0.x linux kernels ok, while gcc 2.8.x sometimes don't, that
gcc 2.7.x therefore is the better/less buggy compiler. 'Tis not so.
Let me explain. I've written compilers for >10 years, and on several
occasions I've constructed compilers that compile via ANSI-C.
Since 1995, I've must have submitted at least 10 bug reports for gcc
2.6.3/2.7.x, where gcc would blatantly miscompile fairly simple code.
In fact, one of these gcc bugs was a complete show-stopper for
the x86 target. No workaround, bogus code, core dumps.
This particular bug wasn't fixed officially (*) until the 2.8.x
series. Now you tell me: "folks don't have to use gcc-2.8.x" ?!
(Ok, so forget 2.8.0. But 2.8.1?) _I_ have _zero_ faith in unpatched
gcc 2.7.x for x86 machines.
[(*) I had an unofficial fix, but that doesn't help third
I wish people would give gcc 2.8.1 a try. If it doesn't work,
_report_ the problem so that compiler hackers like myself can
investigate it and (hopefully) identify the cause and correct it.
As for myself, I've compiled every linux 2.0.3x/2.1.x kernel since
February with 2.8.0/2.8.1. Apart from the ioport.c fix, no problems.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org