[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0901021000020.5086@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 10:04:27 -0800 (PST)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, rdreier@...co.com,
ian.campbell@...rix.com, jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com,
deller@....de, rusty@...tcorp.com.au, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kyle@...artin.ca, randolph@...sq.org,
dave@...uly1.hia.nrc.ca, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kbuild: Disallow GCC 4.1.0 / 4.1.1
On Fri, 2 Jan 2009, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
>
> Bugger....
> Now I cannot do cross compile for: alpha, arm, m68k and sparc.
>
> Not that I actually try to run these beasts but just being able
> to do cross compile has served me well.
We _could_ make a "CONFIG_COMPILE_ONLY" check, but wouldn't it be even
nicer to make sure the cross-compiles are something that might actually be
expected to work?
I realize that cross-tools tend to lag a bit - the pressure to maintain
them tends to be much lower - but I was sure we had somebody who did a
reasonable cross-compiler toolchain. Is gcc-4.1 really the most modern
thing that is easily available?
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists