Linux-kernel mailing list archive 2000-40,: Re: We interrupt you regularly scheduled catfight for.. Linux

# Re: We interrupt you regularly scheduled catfight for.. Linux

Alexander Viro (viro@math.psu.edu)
Sat, 30 Sep 2000 19:30:42 -0400 (EDT)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Ben Collins: "Re: We interrupt you regularly scheduled catfight for.. Linux 2.2.18pre13"
- Previous message: Alan Cox: "Re: [RFC] Imminent death of /proc/locks predicted; film at 11"

On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> I personally dislike the 'autmatically detect kgcc and gcc272' patches a lot,
> and I think we should put a sentence like
>
> If you are using a distribution that ships with a default C compiler that is
> not able to compile linux kernel, use make CC=kgcc (redhat) or CC=gcc272
> (debian) instead.
>
> into README, instead of fiddling around with a command/program with lots of
> different and incompatible versions.

Forget distributions. There is a very, very good reason to have the choice
of cc used in kernel builds uncoupled from the userland one. IMO kgcc is a
misnomer (kcc would be better), but the idea is sound - you don't want to
deal with the miscompiled kernel while you are porting the userland to
another version of compiler. You also don't want it once you've are done
with the userland stuff - level of dependency on gcc details is much
higher in case of the kernel.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

- Next message: Ben Collins: "Re: We interrupt you regularly scheduled catfight for.. Linux 2.2.18pre13"
- Previous message: Alan Cox: "Re: [RFC] Imminent death of /proc/locks predicted; film at 11"