* basslake
You should use gcc 2.95.3 -- look in ftp.suse.com/pub/people/pthomas.
IIRC the good Mr. Thomas provided update rpm's for us :-)
Well That's Good , but is it any better than 2.95.2 ?? Is there any more info - or should we trust by blind faith, that it will not cause problems that 2.95.2 may.
Well, since it is a minor release, it is only bugfixes because 2.95.2 was so buggy. Go look at gcc.gnu.org, and you'll see.
What parts of compiling a kernel could there be some affect ?
Why is ergs circa 1999 , the prefered choice in the /usr/src/linux/documentation/changes ? egcs 1.1.2 (gcc 2.91.66) - ftp://sourceware.cygnus.com/pub/gcc/releases/egcs-1.1.2/egcs-1.1.2.tar.bz2 I can probably answer this myself - because it was a damn good compiler. But who would have known that it could be used to compile the latest kernels .? especially with all the 'updating hype' going on reminds me of -m$ I know don't say it . -semi-rant- Else I would not have updated to gcc2.95.2 -which is not as good as egcs 1.1.2 .
By the time I find this out , I have already compiled kernels 4 times using 2.95.2 I have had quite dubious results. see on this list - the many, ''problems compiling . . .'' messages posted - march-april - . Dubious results may or may not have been caused by the compiler though - but I wish I knew more of what is at fault so I can get on with making my cottage cheese : \ So lets talk compilers once in a while here on the list .
-end-semi-rant-
egcs-1.1.2 is mentioned because the documentation is out of date. -- Mads Martin Joergensen, http://mmj.dk "Why make things difficult, when it is possible to make them cryptic and totally illogic, with just a little bit more effort." -- A. P. J.