Linux 2.4.28-pre2
Hi Marcelo:
Quoted 2 lines
Also a bunch of gcc 3.4 fixes, hopefully we are done with that now.
Fairly close, but not complete. You need the two patches at:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=109327862717567&w=2
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=109292095518054&w=2
(You should have them in your mailbox)
After those, there will still be five warnings which I couldn't find an easy way to deal with:
1. the rio driver:rio_linux.c: In function `rio_init':
rio_linux.c:1209: warning: use of cast expressions as lvalues is deprecated rio_linux.c:1333: warning: use of cast expressions as lvalues is deprecated
2. isdn/eicon:eicon_idi.c: In function `idi_faxdata_send':
eicon_idi.c:2057: warning: use of cast expressions as lvalues is deprecated
3. scsi/53c7,8xx.c:
53c7,8xx.c: In function `NCR53c7xx_queue_command':
53c7,8xx.c:3929: warning: use of cast expressions as lvalues is deprecated
4. rivafb:accel.c: In function `fbcon_riva_writechr':
accel.c:157: warning: use of cast expressions as lvalues is deprecated
5. affs/super.c :super.c: In function `parse_options':
super.c:133: warning: use of conditional expressions as lvalues is deprecated
As you know these are warnings in gcc3.4 but will be failures in 3.5.
Another thing is in scsi/ultrastor.c:ultrastor.c: In function `ultrastor_queuecommand':
ultrastor.c:301: warning: matching constraint does not allow a register ultrastor.c:301: warning: matching constraint does not allow a register
I'm no asm guy so I don't know how serious/how to fix this.
Regards,
Ozkan.
Quoted 7 lines · O.Sezer
Hi Marcelo:
Quoted 2 lines
Also a bunch of gcc 3.4 fixes, hopefully we are done with that now.
Fairly close, but not complete. You need the two patches at:
...
I've found six compile errors in -pre2 with gcc 3.4 I'll send patches for.
There are still tons of warnings for lvalues and a few other warnings, but I don't see a pressing need to fix these:
They are not a real problem with gcc 3.4, and whether gcc 3.5 will ever be supported as compiler for kernel 2.4 is a question whose answer lies far in the future.
Quoted 2 lines
Regards,
Ozkan.
cu
Adrian
Signature · 4 lines
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon SeedQuoted 6 lines · Adrian Bunk
Quoted 3 lines · O.Sezer
Hi Marcelo:
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Also a bunch of gcc 3.4 fixes, hopefully we are done with that now.
Fairly close, but not complete. You need the two patches at:
...I've found six compile errors in -pre2 with gcc 3.4 I'll send patches for.
Which are they, I'm curious?
Quoted 1 line
There are still tons of warnings for lvalues and a few other warnings,
Are there more other than the two patches I referenced fix and the five I listed? Which are they?
Quoted 3 lines
but I don't see a pressing need to fix these:
They are not a real problem with gcc 3.4, and whether gcc 3.5 will ever be supported as compiler for kernel 2.4 is a question whose answer lies far in the future.
That is a valid point but it'd be sad if gcc3.5 wouldn't be supported.
Quoted 3 lines
cu
Adrian
Cheers.
Ozkan
Quoted 5 lines · O.Sezer
Quoted 3 lines
They are not a real problem with gcc 3.4, and whether gcc 3.5 will ever be supported as compiler for kernel 2.4 is a question whose answer lies far in the future.
That is a valid point but it'd be sad if gcc3.5 wouldn't be supported.
Tell that to gcc developpers who constantly break compatibility between versions. I even have userland programs which do not compile anymore with gcc-3.3 and which I don't even know how to 'fix' (workaround ?).
Cheers,
Willy
Quoted 10 lines · Willy Tarreau
Quoted 5 lines · O.Sezer
Quoted 3 lines
They are not a real problem with gcc 3.4, and whether gcc 3.5 will ever be supported as compiler for kernel 2.4 is a question whose answer lies far in the future.
That is a valid point but it'd be sad if gcc3.5 wouldn't be supported.
Tell that to gcc developpers who constantly break compatibility between versions. I even have userland programs which do not compile anymore with gcc-3.3 and which I don't even know how to 'fix' (workaround ?).
I dont care much about having gcc 3.5 work on v2.4 right now. Right now I think we wont ever care about supporting it.
gcc 3.4 is more a of a concern because there is demand for it - Mikael has been maintaining the patches out-of-the-tree for sometime now and I received quite some reports about them (ie there is pressure for that).
But, due to the v2.4 state of life (bugfix mode only), I've been very annoyed by these patches already. Uninliningfunctions is the most annoying thing to me.
It doenst make sense for it (v2.4) to work on new-shiny-gcc next generation, v2.6/2.7 are there to support those.