Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262469AbUKDWBN (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Nov 2004 17:01:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262468AbUKDWAS (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Nov 2004 17:00:18 -0500 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:1983 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262451AbUKDV4E (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Nov 2004 16:56:04 -0500 Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 13:55:43 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: Adam Heath cc: Chris Wedgwood , Christoph Hellwig , Timothy Miller , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: support of older compilers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <41894779.10706@techsource.com> <20041103211353.GA24084@infradead.org> <20041103233029.GA16982@taniwha.stupidest.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1064 Lines: 29 On Thu, 4 Nov 2004, Adam Heath wrote: > > > > First off, for some people that is literally where _most_ of the CPU > > cycles go. > > So find a fast machine. As I have already said, you don't need to compile a > kernel for a slow machine/arch *on* a slow machine/arch. I _have_ a fast machine. Others don't. And quite frankly, even I tend to prioritize things like "nice and quiet" over absolute speed. > I don't doubt these are issues. That's not what I am discussing. Sure it is. You're complaining that developers use old versions of gcc. They do so for a reason. Old versions of gcc are sometimes better. They are better in many ways. Your "use new versions of gcc even if it is slower" argument doesn't make any _sense_. If the new versions aren't any better, why would you want to use them? Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/