From: "Steve Snyder" <swsnyder AT home DOT com>
To: "pgcc AT delorie DOT com" <pgcc AT delorie DOT com>,
        "robert somerville" <somervil AT cadvision DOT com>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 00:12:53 -0400 (EST)
X-Mailer: PMMail 2.10.1999 for OS/2 Warp 4.00
In-Reply-To: <3815B9BF.CAE55EFA@cadvision.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Question: pgcc1.1.2 vs pgcc2.95.1 and stability
Message-Id: <19991027051249.GTQL28125.mail.rdc1.il.home.com@mercury.snydernet.lan>
Reply-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 26 Oct 1999 08:25:03 -0600, robert somerville wrote:

>Is 2.95.1 recommended over 1.1.2 for compiling Kernels, etc  on a K6-2.
>
>I get feeling from this mailing list that 2.95.1 has problems at higher optimization
>levels ??
>
>Any opinions ??

The use of v2.95.1 for compiling v2.2.x kernel is officially frowned 
upon due to miscompilation of some kernel code.  Unless you're 
building development kernels, stay with v1.1.2.

BTW, rumor has it that egcs v2.95.2 will soon be released.  That might
be a reason for holding off on any compiler decisions for a little
while.


*** Steve Snyder ***