VMware Question

[Warren Togami]

----- Original Message -----
From: "MonMotha" <monmotha at indy.rr.com>
To: "Linux & Unix Advocates & Users" <luau at list.luau.hi.net>
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2002 11:41 AM
Subject: [luau] Re: VMware Question


> Well, I wouldn't even go so far as to consider gcc 2.96 a compiler.
> It's horribly broken and quite possibly VMWare complained because of
> that (RedHat did know that this compiler was broken, and included kgcc
> for kernel compiling as 2.95 can't compile the kernel).  You might try
> CC=kgcc before you tell it to bulid the kernel modules.  Personally
> though, I'd get gcc 2.95.x (or MAYBE 3.x, but 3.x still has some
problems).
>
> --MonMotha

gcc 2.96 has been extremely stable for a while now.  It had some severe
problems in Red Hat 7.0 and 7.1, but 7.2 is solid.  Mandrake 8.x uses gcc
2.96 too.

kgcc was not needed since Red Hat 7.0.  I haven't had a need to install it
for a while now.  gcc 2.96 compiles newer 2.2 and 2.4 kernel trees just
fine.

The main thing it currently lacks is CPU optimizations for in-line assembly
stuff.  It will simply skip over it and return "true" as if it compiled it
properly.  That's why the MPlayer developers complain about 2.96.