Re: gcc bug causing problem in kernel builds

• Next message: Russell King: "Re: How should nano_sleep be fixed (was: ptrace(), fork(), sleep(), exit(), SIGCHLD)"
• Previous message: george anzinger: "Re: How should nano_sleep be fixed (was: ptrace(), fork(), sleep(), exit(), SIGCHLD)"
• In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: gcc bug causing problem in kernel builds"
• Next in thread: Jakub Jelinek: "Re: gcc bug causing problem in kernel builds"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Alan Cox wrote:
 
> gcc 2.96-54 had plenty of bugs, 2.96-75+ should be perfectly fine for
> all uses.

Uh oh... the gcc 2.96 I'm using is:

# rpm -q gcc
gcc-2.96-81

> If you have a 2.96 RH problem please report it in Red Hat
> bugzilla

Will do.

Thanks,
Paul

Paul.Clements@SteelEye.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

• Next message: Russell King: "Re: How should nano_sleep be fixed (was: ptrace(), fork(), sleep(), exit(), SIGCHLD)"
• Previous message: george anzinger: "Re: How should nano_sleep be fixed (was: ptrace(), fork(), sleep(), exit(), SIGCHLD)"
• In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: gcc bug causing problem in kernel builds"
• Next in thread: Jakub Jelinek: "Re: gcc bug causing problem in kernel builds"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 23 2001 - 21:01:01 EST