Some people like using their old 1960 Model T to travel around town in style
instead of a 2000 Ranger.
I don't consider 2.95.2 bleeding edge. It's a release version that has been
out for a while. 3.0 is around the corner. You can't write modern code for
modern processors with legacy tools. The only thing legacy tools support is
legacy hardware. Modern tools for modern hardware.
-d
Matthew Vanecek wrote:
> Richard Gooch wrote:
> > Tired of your 2.4.0-test2 kernel not compiling, even though you're
> > using the recommended compiler and binutils? Or maybe you think
> > Documentation/Changes is out of date, but no-one from On High has
> > given a hint as to what you should be using?
> >
> > Then look no further. This patch brings 2.4.0-test2 closer to
> > perfection.
> >
> > And may all those who use the latest, bleeding-edge compilers and
> > binutils, and assume "All the world's a bleeding-edge
> > eeeegcs/binutils+++" drown in the spit of a thousand camels.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Richard....
>
> How can 2.95.2 possibly be considered bleeding edge? And why should we
> be forced to be stuck with old, obsolete compilers and utilities for
> compiling our kernel? Shouldn't forward progress in the kernel include
> supporting current stable compilers, like 2.95.2? Just because it's a
> little more ANSI compliant than previous compilers shouldn't stop us
> from using it.
>
> The world moves on. Shouldn't we, also?
-- "The difference between 'involvement' and 'commitment' is like an eggs-and-ham breakfast: the chicken was 'involved' - the pig was 'committed'."
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jun 26 2000 - 21:00:06 EST