On Thursday 29 November 2001 06:53 pm, dman wrote: > On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 06:42:04PM +0200, Dragos Delcea (Bucaresti, Ro) wrote: > | well, thats about it...is it known not to? > > Likely. Since gcc 3 is so new, it is also likely that there are bugs > in it. The kernel tends to trigger some rare bugs in the compiler, > which is why I beleive they only supported gcc 2.7.2 for a long time. > I think now they've switched to 2.95.2 (or .3). > > If you can track down the cause of the non-compilation (kernel source > bug, gcc bug, etc) that would certainly be benificial to all (assuming > you publicize your findings :-)). > > -D well, I'll try again tomorow; for now I installed 2.95 and got over it... I'll let you all know what I find out (I think it is gcc for it gave me an error screen which told me to submit a bug report to [EMAIL PROTECTED]) however, can I trust it to compile anything else except the kernel? like samba, amavisd, etc...?
dragos