>> I have heard that gcc 2.8.1 has quit a few bugs and I have seen some of
>>these (i think anyway). For instance when ever I recompile my kernel
>>with gcc 2.8.1 I can't get X to work, also with 2.8.1 I can't compile
>>the X source. Are there patches for these bugs?
> Yes, gcc-2.8.1 is buggy, but that's not why you can't get X to work.
> Those are kernel bugs. The fix is twofold:
Not THAT buggy...
The problem is in the kernel: a code block was written as a turn around
for a bug in gcc 2.7.x; with 2.8 the bug is gone and now the code in the
kernel no longer works properly! Ain't life fun?
Quote:> 1. Get rid of gcc-2.8.x. It's dead.
No it's not; it's just progressing at the usual gcc speed: no publicity,
Quote:> Egcs-1.x is the actively maintained GNU compiler line.
Egcs is a independent branch of gcc started by Cygnus Corp. using a
bazaar development model (thus faster, but many people start to
use unstable snapshots with unpredictable results; stable releases
Quote:> 2. Switch to the 2.1.x series kernels, which have been adapted
> to work with the Egcs compiler (as well as with gcc-2.7).
What makes you say that 2.1.x kernels are less buggy than gcc 2.8.1?
2.1.x are development versions whereas gcc 2.8.1 is supposed to be
a stable well-tested release.
> 1. Go back to gcc-22.214.171.124, and stay with the 2.0.x kernel.
> The kernel bugs have avoided tickling it.
Or use kernel 2.0.35; I guess the problem should be cured there and
you can stick with stable kernels...
Hope this helps!