Pavel Machek wrote:
> 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?).
What fails, when you use egcs-1.1.2 to build 2.0.x or early 2.2.x?
Maybe they need -fno-strict-aliasing... is that what you are referring
to?
Regards,
Jeff
--
Jeff Garzik | "Mind if I drive?" -Sam
Building 1024 | "Not if you don't mind me clawing at
the
MandrakeSoft | dash and screaming like a
cheerleader."
| -Max
-
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
- Re: Recommended compi... Peter Samuelson

