> to spot it, and ditto with any others who do the same. If everyone could have
> agreed a name for the kernel compiler that would be even better.
Sorry, I was probably unclear as I wasn't about the name of the compiler,
nor the neccissity of using an outdated gcc version for kernel compiles.
> As to compatibility I am told by folks working on the gnu C/C++ that library
> level compatibility should be 100% between 2.96+ and 3.0 while 2.95 is an
> isolated incompatible pseudo-release at C++ level.
The problem is not the library level but the ABI that did change and will
change, which is widely known and should have been pointed out by your
informants :(
Anyway, this is really starting to be off-topic, sorry..
--
-----==- |
----==-- _ |
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +--
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg@opengroup.org |e|
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+
The choice of a GNU generation |
|
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 30 2000 - 21:00:27 EST