[NBLUG TALK] RedHat 7.0 issue

Rick Moen rick at linuxmafia.com
Fri Oct 6 19:26:56 PDT 2000


begin  Eric Eisenhart quotation:

> Basically, they've given the most recent version of gcc that they felt
> was appropriate for regular compilation and then a separate package
> for compiling the kernel, since very few people would be happy with
> the version of gcc old enough to compile the kernel for anything else.

The canonical version for kernel compiles is still 2.7.2.3, _not_ the
2.91 provided in Red Hat 7.  Some versions of the gcc 2.9 series (aka
"egcs") _sometimes_ yield OK results on kernels, but haven't been tested
very thoroughly and often either the compiles error out or the resulting
kernel images won't boot.  (The linux-kernel mailing list doesn't want
to hear your bug reports if you're not using 2.7.2.*.)

So, if Red Hat's choice of a "kgcc" gives you problems, get a real
kernel compiler.  ;->

"The most recent version of gcc that they felt was appropriate for
regular compilation" (1) is _not_ technically gcc, but rather a Red
Hat-invented mutation of a betaware CVS checkout, and (2) creates
binaries that are incompatible both with everyone else's binaries and
with those that will be compiled in the future by the upcoming gcc 3.0.
One safer choice would have been a patched 2.95 -- the most recent
released version of gcc.  They say they didn't do this because it has
problems on some non-x86 chips (e.g., Alpha).  

This may be arguably true.  It's probably an inopportune time to release
a distribution.

-- 
Cheers,                   "Teach a man to make fire, and he will be warm 
Rick Moen                 for a day.  Set a man on fire, and he will be warm
rick at linuxmafia.com       for the rest of his life."   -- John A. Hrastar



More information about the talk mailing list