[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: kernel and gcc issues -- giving it one more shot

On 29 Jul 2003, Mike Chambers wrote:

> On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 12:12, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> >   
> >   but is there any reason *not* to rebuild the kernel using gcc 3.3, in
> > order to avoid any future mismatch issues? 
> There are/were issues with the latest 2.4 kernels and gcc-3.3 and they
> won't compile, so that is why 3.2 was/is used.  Not sure on the very
> lastest as of today or if there is any sort of work around.
> Maybe one of the kernel folks can comment on it.

well, i'm not one of them, but in trying to build the kernel source with
the config file as it comes with severn, i've already have to deselect a
couple of options that causes gcc 3.3 to choke.  not options that i needed
so i didn't feel badly about it.

i suspect these are marginally-written modules that the more forgiving gcc
3.2 let go, but gcc 3.3 wasn't going to accept. as we speak, the build is
progressing -- we're beyond the kernel and into the modules.

the whole point of this is that i'm going to take another stab at 
upgrading to a 2.6.0 kernel of *some* kind, and i figure at least
verifying that i can compile a working kernel with gcc 3.3 is a small
step along the way.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]