news about default kernel compliers

Bruce Dubbs bdubbs at swbell.net
Tue Jun 24 07:35:59 PDT 2003


Kelledin wrote:

>On Monday 23 June 2003 11:54 am, Steve Prior wrote:
>  
>
>>I was wondering about compilers and Red Hat 8.0 - they seem to
>>use gcc 3.2 and I thought that was a no no for recompiling the
>>kernel, but they have no special notes (or an alternative
>>compiler) about doing so.  Does anyone know if it is really OK
>>to rebuild a kernel with this level of the compiler?
>>    
>>
>
>It depends on the platform.  I would guesstimate that it's OK for 
>x86 at this point, and the kernel developers are just being 
>ultra-conservative in recommending 2.95.3 for x86.
>
>That recommendation doesn't apply to all platforms, though, and 
>IIRC the kernel docs state that quite clearly.  On some non-x86 
>platforms, gcc3 is kind of a necessity to build a kernel.  On 
>Alpha, gcc-2.95.3 has a habit of ICEing when compiling SMP 
>kernels.  And for AMD64, I don't think gcc-2.x even exists...
>  
>

At Usenix a couple of weeks ago, I asked Ted T'so what compiler to use 
with the kernel and he told me gcc-3.2.
  -- Bruce

-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list