Re: pre egcs-1.1 testing and Linux 2.1.x

Linus Torvalds (torvalds@transmeta.com)
Sun, 23 Aug 1998 13:22:17 -0700 (PDT)


On Sun, 23 Aug 1998, David S. Miller wrote:
>
> BULLSHIT, remember that whole "local label in inline function" fiasco?
> That was a Kenner change in Kenner's tree, that I wanted to kill
> before it got merged into the egcs tree. Case closed.

That is sad.

That's the other real beef I've had with gcc development lately, and was
the reason I reacted so strongly to this. If that was Kenner, then I do
retract the statement that Kenner never did me no wrong. I just happened
to interact with the egcs people on it.

I've actually been very happy with gcc development 99% of the time. I
never had a problem at all until very recently, but now within a few
months of each other I've had two cases where I thought the maintainers
acted completely irrationally, wanting to disable features that had better
fixes.

[ Yes, even the "disable certain optimizations" patch is a better fix than
disabling the cases that can trigger the optimization bugs. No, I don't
like that patch either, but I like it a whole lot more than trying to
just make the bug harder to notice ]

Linus

-
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.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html