On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 11:01:45PM -0400, Kurt Wall wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 12:26:07AM +0200, Adrian Bunk took 109 lines to write:
> > This patch removes support for gcc < 3.2 .
> >
> > The advantages are:
> > - reducing the number of supported gcc versions from 8 to 4 [1]
> > allows the removal of several #ifdef's and workarounds
> > - my impression is that the older compilers are only rarely
> > used, so miscompilations of a driver with an old gcc might
> > not be detected for a longer amount of time
> >
> > My personal opinion about the time and space a compilation requires is
> > that this is no longer that much of a problem for modern hardware, and
> > in the worst case you can compile the kernels for older machines on more
> > recent machines.
>
> Environments that require kernel compilation, often multiple times,
> testing, benefit from shorter compile times. It can be the difference
> between, say, completing a test suite overnight instead of having to
> wait until tomorrow afternoon. Keeping 2.95, at least, has some value
> in such environments.
I *do* still use 2.95 a lot, and I'm not alone, judging from people
around me. 2.95 has been the reference for a very long time, that's
why it's still so much present. 3.0 and 3.1 (even 3.2) have been
there for a very short time frame, but 2.95 and 3.3 really seem to
be references compilers.
So please keep support for 2.95.
Cheers,
Willy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |