Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 25 Nov 2000 12:57:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 25 Nov 2000 12:57:41 -0500 Received: from brutus.conectiva.com.br ([200.250.58.146]:57585 "EHLO brutus.conectiva.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 25 Nov 2000 12:57:30 -0500 Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 15:26:15 -0200 (BRDT) From: Rik van Riel To: Neil Brown cc: Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl, greg@linuxpower.cx, viro@math.psu.edu, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, bernds@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@transmeta.com Subject: Re: gcc-2.95.2-51 is buggy In-Reply-To: <14878.58.908955.701821@notabene.cse.unsw.edu.au> Message-ID: 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 On Fri, 24 Nov 2000, Neil Brown wrote: > On Friday November 24, Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl wrote: > > >> ... RedHat's GCC snapshot "2.96" handles this case just fine. > > > > > Now, if you can isolate the relevant part of the diff between > > > 2.95.2 and RH 2.96... > > > > Maybe I have to be more precise in the statement "gcc 2.95.2 is buggy". [image from FTP site not buggy] > > This is from a SuSE distribution, I forget which, not very recent. > > Revised summary: gcc-2.95.2-51 from SuSE is buggy. > > Ditto for gcc-2.95.2-13 from Debian (potato). It exhibits the > same bug. Debian applies a total of 49 patches to gcc and the > libraries. The gcc-2.95.2-6cl from Conectiva 6.0 is buggy too. (and the ISO images haven't even been available for one week yet ... *sigh*) regards, Rik -- Hollywood goes for world dumbination, Trailer at 11. http://www.conectiva.com/ http://www.surriel.com/ - 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/