X-pop3-spooler:	POP3MAIL 2.1.0 b 4 980420 -bs-
Date:	Mon, 14 Sep 1998 07:58:54 -0500 (EST)
From:	Steven Snyder <ssnyder AT indy DOT net>
X-Sender:	ssnyder AT indy1
To:	Marc Lehmann <pcg AT goof DOT com>
cc:	Hans Dumbrajs <hans AT clinet DOT fi>, beastium <beastium-list AT Desk DOT nl>
Subject:	Re: Problems with Linux kernel compiled with pgcc
In-Reply-To:	<19980914032524.50325@cerebro.laendle>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.96.980914075151.22269B-100000@indy1>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Sender:	Marc Lehmann <pcg AT goof DOT com>
Status:	RO
X-Status:	A
Lines:	31

I think that the compiler restriction on 2.0.x kernel building depends on
*which* modules are compiled.

I've been successfully running a 2.0.36-0.x kernel built with pgcc for
over a month.  (First with pgcc v1.03a, now with v1.1a.)  My kernel, built
with -O4 optimization, is fully functional and doesn't even issue scary
messages, let alone crash.

My conclusion is that there are some modules in the kernel source tree
that don't like egcs/pgcc, but that I'm not building them.

On Mon, 14 Sep 1998, Marc Lehmann wrote:

> On Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 09:30:44AM +0000, Hans Dumbrajs wrote:
> >=20
> > I=B4m having a problem with pgcc and the Linux kernel (2.0.35).
> > If I comile everything into ther kernel, and don=B4t use modules,
> > everything runs just fine.
> > If I compile certain parts of the kernel as modules I cannot use any
> > craphical applications such as
>=20
> Thats a known bug in 2.0 kernels. You have to use gcc-2.7.2 for them.
>=20
>       -----=3D=3D-                                              |
>       ----=3D=3D-- _                                            |
>       ---=3D=3D---(_)__  __ ____  __       Marc Lehmann       +--
>       --=3D=3D---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /       pcg AT goof DOT com       |e|
>       -=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\                          --+
>     The choice of a GNU generation                        |
>                                                           |
>=20

- Raw text -