| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4C91479E.3040208@zytor.com> Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 15:24:30 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> To: Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com> CC: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Bump gcc minimum version to 3.4, 4.1 for x86 On 09/13/2010 05:11 PM, Brian Gerst wrote: > 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. > 4.1 -> 2.16 3.4 -> 2.14/2.15 (gcc 3.4.0 beat binutils 2.15 by a mere 29 days) This is somewhat unfortunate, since neither of these brackets eliminate the Binutils Version From Hell, a.k.a. 2.16. -hpa -- 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