Skip to contentSkip to conversation

Documentation/arm/README: small update

PATCH In review Adrian Bunk 2 participants 3 messages Aug 24, 2005 – Sep 2, 2005 Documentation

lore
Share & tools
lore
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 Documentation/arm/README: small update

- egcs is not supported by kernel 2.6
- Am I right to assume that gcc 2.95.3 is not worse than gcc 2.95.1?

Documentation/arm/README renamed from Documentation/arm/README.old +2 -2
@@ -8,8 +8,8 @@
 ---------------------
 
   In order to compile ARM Linux, you will need a compiler capable of
-  generating ARM ELF code with GNU extensions.  GCC 2.95.1, EGCS
-  1.1.2, and GCC 3.3 are known to be good compilers.  Fortunately, you
+  generating ARM ELF code with GNU extensions.  GCC 2.95.3 and
+  GCC 3.3 are known to be good compilers.  Fortunately, you
   needn't guess.  The kernel will report an error if your compiler is
   a recognized offender.
 
#1 lore raw
Quoted 1 line · Adrian Bunk

- egcs is not supported by kernel 2.6

Ok.

Quoted 1 line

- Am I right to assume that gcc 2.95.3 is not worse than gcc 2.95.1?

No idea - I've given up tracking what compilers work and don't work on the grounds that I'm too scared to change my compiler! gcc 3.3 works fine here which is the only version I use (until it's proven far too buggy through local experience).

That probably means we should say "at least GCC 3.3" though I'm not sure if that's entirely accurate.

Toolchains are just pure evil as far as stability on ARM goes.

Signature · 3 lines
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:  2.6 Serial core
#2 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 Documentation/arm/README: small update

Quoted 12 lines · Russell King
Quoted 1 line · Adrian Bunk

- egcs is not supported by kernel 2.6

Ok.

Quoted 1 line

- Am I right to assume that gcc 2.95.3 is not worse than gcc 2.95.1?

No idea - I've given up tracking what compilers work and don't work on the grounds that I'm too scared to change my compiler! gcc 3.3 works fine here which is the only version I use (until it's proven far too buggy through local experience).

Quoted 4 lines

That probably means we should say "at least GCC 3.3" though I'm not sure if that's entirely accurate.

Toolchains are just pure evil as far as stability on ARM goes.

What about the patch below to simply recommend gcc 3.3?

It doesn't imply other compilers weren't usable and removes the references to the older compilers.

Quoted 1 line

Russell King

cu
Adrian

<-- snip -->

- egcs is not supported by kernel 2.6
- gcc 3.3 seems to be a good choice on ARM

Documentation/arm/README renamed from Documentation/arm/README.old +3 -4
@@ -8,10 +8,9 @@
 ---------------------
 
   In order to compile ARM Linux, you will need a compiler capable of
-  generating ARM ELF code with GNU extensions.  GCC 2.95.1, EGCS
-  1.1.2, and GCC 3.3 are known to be good compilers.  Fortunately, you
-  needn't guess.  The kernel will report an error if your compiler is
-  a recognized offender.
+  generating ARM ELF code with GNU extensions.  GCC 3.3 is known to be
+  a good compiler.  Fortunately, you needn't guess.  The kernel will report
+  an error if your compiler is a recognized offender.
 
   To build ARM Linux natively, you shouldn't have to alter the ARCH = line
   in the top level Makefile.  However, if you don't have the ARM Linux ELF