Re: A patch for glibc 2.0/2.1

[hjl@lucon.org (H.J. Lu)]

>    > 
>    >    Can we add this glibc 2.1? That is we check for gcc 2.8 and disallow it
>    >    for glibc 2.1.
>    > 
>    > Please do not do this.  egcs may be superior to gcc 2.8.1, but gcc
>    > still is a good C compiler.  I use gcc 2.8.1 exclusively without
>    > problems.  Moreover it still is the latest official release.  We
>    > should find a solution that works for both egcs and gcc 2.8.1.
>    > 
> 
>    You can use gcc 2.8.1 for everything else. I just don't want to
>    support gcc 2.8.1 to compile glibc 2.1. It is quite trivial to
>    install egcs 1.1.1/Linux along with gcc 2.8.1 and use egcs
>    1.1.1/Linux to compile glibc 2.1.
> 
> But why?  I cannot see any problems since gcc 2.8.1 compiles glibc 2.1
> just fine.  I have no problem with recommending egcs over gcc 2.8.1,
> but why should we prevent anybody from using gcc 2.8.1?
> 
> 

glibc is the foundation of a Linux system. We have to deal ANY
potential problems. So many developers have been actively working
on egcs. But very few people work on gcc. When something goes wrong
with glibc which is caused by egcs, we can expect it will be fixed
very quickly. The worst case is I may have to make a Linux release
of egcs to address the problem. But the same thing cannot be said
for gcc. We don't want to be flooded with ANY glibc bug reports
associated with gcc. That is why I suggest we require egcs for
compiling glibc 2.1.

H.J.