Re: [PATCH] 2.4 Changes update (was Re: [patch] kernel/module.c)

2000-10-25 Thread Paul Gortmaker
Andrew Morton wrote: > But all the documentation has for years been saying that > 2.7.2.3 is the one true compiler, so we are now in for 12 > months worth of bogus oops reports. > > This patch will help: > > --- linux-2.4.0-test10-pre5/arch/i386/kernel/setup.cTue Oct 24 [...] > + > +#if (__GN

Re: [PATCH] 2.4 Changes update (was Re: [patch] kernel/module.c)

2000-10-25 Thread Marcus Sundberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Morton) writes: > --- linux-2.4.0-test10-pre5/./README Sun Oct 15 01:27:35 2000 > +++ linux-akpm/./README Wed Oct 25 22:11:26 2000 > @@ -161,12 +161,12 @@ > > COMPILING the kernel: > > - - Make sure you have gcc-2.7.2 or newer available. It seems older gcc >

Re: [PATCH] 2.4 Changes update (was Re: [patch] kernel/module.c)

2000-10-25 Thread Andrew Morton
"Barry K. Nathan" wrote: > > Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > It seems that gcc-2.7.2.3 is terminally ill. I'd rather change > > Documentation/Changes, and just document the fact. > > FWIW, here's a patch that does that. Looks good. But all the documentation has for years been saying that 2.7.2.3

[PATCH] 2.4 Changes update (was Re: [patch] kernel/module.c)

2000-10-24 Thread Barry K. Nathan
[I accidentally sent the message to vger.rutgers.edu the first time. Sorry.] Linus Torvalds wrote: > It seems that gcc-2.7.2.3 is terminally ill. I'd rather change > Documentation/Changes, and just document the fact. FWIW, here's a patch that does that. It also fixes a typo ("IA/32" should be "