| To: | Johannes Stezenbach <js@convergence.de> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: gcc include strangeness |
| From: | Ralf Baechle <ralf@oss.sgi.com> |
| Date: | Mon, 11 Feb 2002 23:20:01 +0100 |
| Cc: | "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl>, Florian Lohoff <flo@rfc822.org>, linux-mips@oss.sgi.com |
| In-reply-to: | <20020211162844.GD2918@convergence.de>; from js@convergence.de on Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 05:28:44PM +0100 |
| References: | <20020211142708.GA2577@convergence.de> <Pine.GSO.3.96.1020211155920.18917F-100000@delta.ds2.pg.gda.pl> <20020211162844.GD2918@convergence.de> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.2.5i |
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 05:28:44PM +0100, Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > > Is gcc 3.x already stable enough to be used by people not directly > > involved in gcc development? More specifically for MIPS/Linux and > > i386/Linux, for both the kernel and the userland? I'm told it is not. > > I'm reading about gcc 3.x code generation bugs every now and then, > but so far I did not hit any of them. I've fixed several kernel bugs that got triggered by building with 3.0. We've got an a piece of inline assembler where a constraint gets ignored by 3.0 resulting in bad code. Add slow compilation and slow code. 3.0? No way. Yet. Ralf |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: gcc include strangeness, Ralf Baechle |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: gcc-2.96-99 optimization bug?, Atsushi Nemoto |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: gcc include strangeness, Maciej W. Rozycki |
| Next by Thread: | Re: gcc include strangeness, Dominic Sweetman |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |