From: Tom Walsh (tom@cyberiansoftware.com)
Date: Mon Jan 22 2001 - 12:54:30 EST
"Schipper, Martijn (Contractor)" wrote: > > My questions are: > - Why is everybody using 2.96? We are not! The 2.96 is a RedHat mistake and is not an offically santioned release, it is a hacked version of gcc that RedHat mistakenly released and mis-represented as a full release! AFAIK, the 2.96 has some "improvements" in the C++ code generation that made the RedHat 7 release possible. It is NOT a production compiler! > - What version of 2.96 is this then? (what patches are applied?) > - Which of these patches are going to be incorporated in GCC 3.0? GCC 3.0 is still "pie-in-the-sky", AFAIK, there is no planned release date for it. > - Why can't I use the GCC -fpic or -fPIC options to create Position Independent > code? > - Why do I need the patch from Philip Blundell? (To what source tree should I > apply this patch?) Philip is the maintainer of the ARM gcc cross-compilier, he hacks the gcc sources so that it can emit the necessary opcodes that the ARM processor runs on. > - Why do I need the patch from Vadim Lebedev? (To what source tree should I > apply this patch?) > - Is there another patch that implements the -mdisable-got option? > I would suggest that you get the RPMs: 'ftp://ftp.netwinder.org/users/c/chagas/arm-linux-cross/RPMS/' Regards, TomW -- Tom Walsh - WN3L - Embedded Systems Consultant 'www.openhardware.net', 'www.cyberiansoftware.com' "Windows? No thanks, I have work to do..." This message resent by the uclinux-dev@uclinux.org list server http://www.uClinux.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Sep 19 2002 - 13:19:27 EDT