Hi!
> > if the person who sent you the -pre4 patch against module.c
> > had Cc:'ed this mailing list then your kernel would do
> > something useful when compiled with gcc-2.7.2.3.
>
> It seems that gcc-2.7.2.3 is terminally ill. I'd rather change
> Documentation/Changes, and just document the fact.
>
> These kinds of subtle work-arounds for gcc bugs are not really acceptable,
> nor is it worthwhile complaining when somebody does development with a gcc
> that is _not_ broken, and doesn't notice that some random gcc bug breaks
> the kernel for others.
Would it be possible to keep 2.7.2.3? You still need 2.7.2.3 to
reliably compile 2.0.X (and maybe even 2.2.all-but-latest?).
Pavel
--
I'm [EMAIL PROTECTED] "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care."
Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- [patch] kernel/module.c (plus gratuitous rant) Andrew Morton
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (plus gratuitous r... Linus Torvalds
- [PATCH] 2.4 Changes update (was Re: [patch... Barry K. Nathan
- Re: [PATCH] 2.4 Changes update (was Re... Andrew Morton
- Re: [PATCH] 2.4 Changes update (wa... Marcus Sundberg
- Re: [PATCH] 2.4 Changes update (wa... Paul Gortmaker
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (plus gratuito... Andrew Morton
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (plus gratuito... Pavel Machek
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (plus grat... Jeff Garzik
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (plus grat... Alan Cox
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (plus grat... Keith Owens
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (plus ... Richard Henderson
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (... Peter Samuelson
- Re: [patch] kernel/module... Richard Henderson
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (plus ... Rusty Russell
- Re: [patch] kernel/module.c (... Peter Samuelson
- Recommended compiler? - R... Linux Kernel Developer

