> > > Do we now have a fork of gcc (gcc 2.8 and egcs 1.01)? Or
> > > are these in fact one and the same?
> >
> > They're not.
> > gcc 2.8 is aimed at being 100% reliable,
>
> For what it's worth, it doesn't seem to have quite reached that aim
> yet. When I compile kernel 2.0.33 with gcc 2.7.2.3, it works fine.
> When I compile the same kernel (same configuration, after executing
> "make mrproper") with gcc 2.8.0, my X servers and certain other
> programs dump core. I don't have detailed information yet, but it
> appears that the programs are dumping core in routines that perform
> I/O port access.
>
> Has anyone else experienced this? Should I try to gather more
> information on the problem?
Yes- when I compiled a 2.0.33 kernel for a 486 (for a diskless X box)
the X server dumped core on an i/o syscall. But- my 2.0.33 kernel
compiled for a pentium works flawlessly on my K5. I think that the
deciding factor is the arch you compile for- all stuff compiled -m486
seems to break. I was wondering why squid kept dying on my 486 proxy :)
But i did have problems with 2.7.2.3 sig11'ing when compiling certain
stuff- i think that might have been related to a broken slackware
distro.
When i get a chance, i'll see if -m386 breaks things too.