From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew Morton <andrewm@uow.edu.au>
To: Joe Buck <jbuck@racerx.synopsys.com>
Cc: gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: comparisons..
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 21:46:00 -0000
Message-id: <396E9ABE.9CF88403@uow.edu.au>
References: <396D814D.5F59689F@uow.edu.au> <200007131611.JAA17319@racerx.synopsys.com>
X-SW-Source: 2000-07/msg00433.html

Joe Buck wrote:
> 
> 
> But the current gcc is not 2.95, it is 2.95.2.  Are there remaining
> problems in 2.95.2 that cause difficulties for the Linux kernel?

I don't know, Joe.

Cruising recent postings doesn't give anything very substantive:



From:  Artur Skawina

gcc2.96 miscompiles eg sys_fork(), one workaround is:

  # turn off broken sibling call optimizations
  CFLAGS += $(shell if $(CC) -fno-optimize-sibling-calls -S -o /dev/null
-xc /dev/null >/dev/null 2>&1; then
echo "-fno-optimize-sibling-calls"; fi)

From: Alan Cox

2.96 still fails to get you working x86 kernels although how
much of that is gcc and how much kernel stuff is unknown



I'm not aware of any issues with 2.95.2 though.