Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S129992AbQKEWpK>; Sun, 5 Nov 2000 17:45:10 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S129998AbQKEWpA>; Sun, 5 Nov 2000 17:45:00 -0500
Received: from lightning.swansea.linux.org.uk ([194.168.151.1]:19520 "EHLO
	the-village.bc.nu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id <S129992AbQKEWoo>; Sun, 5 Nov 2000 17:44:44 -0500
Subject: Re: non-gcc linux?
To: Tim@Rikers.org (Tim Riker)
Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2000 22:45:15 +0000 (GMT)
Cc: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox),
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org (Linux Kernel Mailing List)
In-Reply-To: <3A05C888.7558E0F0@Rikers.org> from "Tim Riker" at Nov 05, 2000 01:52:24 PM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <E13sYXM-0005fR-00@the-village.bc.nu>
From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

> Perhaps I did not explain myself, or perhaps I misunderstand your
> comments. I was responding to a comment that we could just copy some of
> the optimizations from Pro64 over into gcc. Whether Pro64 understands
> gcc syntax is immaterial to this question is it not?

If gcc is architecturally unable to do ia64 well, pro64 is free software and
both understand the same syntax Im at a bit of a loss why that is productive ?
-
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/