linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Bump gcc minimum version to 3.4, 4.1 for x86

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <AANLkTi=JpfhvyxC13U98x5me9U8dU6BHOcGkPC0KK7aW@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 13 Sep 2010 20:11:53 -0400
From:	Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Bump gcc minimum version to 3.4, 4.1 for x86

On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 4:14 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> This patchset bumps the minimum supported gcc version to 3.4 for the
> general kernel, and to 4.1 for x86.
>
> We have had a rash of bug reports related to these really old
> compilers and their associated binutils version lately, and it is
> clear that the support burden of these older compilers is getting to
> be excessive.  If you really want to build a kernel on a system that
> old you can build or obtain an updated gcc/binutils as well.

What version of binutils does this correspond to?  It would be nice to
clean up some of the hacks for ancient binutils as well.

--
Brian Gerst
--
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/