Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 08:10:41 +0100 From: "Gary Palmer" <gpalmer@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Cc: jmacd@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Josh MacDonald), imp@village.org, witr@rwwa.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: GNU binutils port Message-ID: <10783.829120241@palmer.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 10 Apr 1996 16:36:00 %2B0930." <199604100706.QAA22095@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Michael Smith wrote in message ID <199604100706.QAA22095@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au>: > Josh MacDonald stands accused of saying: > > Its getting ridiculous, considering how easy it is to import > > the tree. NetBSD has it running, why, may I ask, is the 2.2 > > tree not tracking gcc-2.7? > Because last time people tried (2.7.2 IIRC), it failed to correctly compile > the kernel, the X servers, and a few other things people threw at it. I seem to remember this is because of small changes in the way GCC specific stuff is handled, and there is TONS of that scattered throughout our tree, and no-one who has the knowledge of how to fix this has the time. I also think the general opinion was ``wait until they bring out a release which has fewer problems than most of the 2.7.x series (to date) had, or we'll just be causing problems for ourselves''. Gary
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?10783.829120241>