Bug 45461 – gcc 3.3-hammer for ppc64 is a mule

• Status: VERIFIED WONTFIX
• Product: Gentoo Linux

[Description Tom Gall (RETIRED) 2004-03-22 19:09:50 UTC]

current gcc compiler based on the hammer branch 3.3 for ppc64 does not produce working kernels.

[Comment 1 Luca Barbato 2004-03-23 04:35:11 UTC]

I'm about to commit a newer snapshot, please try that one

[Comment 2 Tom Gall (RETIRED) 2004-04-25 19:47:09 UTC]

3.4 is fine and quite frankly it'll be better to get off the hammer branch onto mainline. The current 3.4 pre date 0417 in portage works just great. There's no point in doing anything with this bug.

[Comment 3 Tom Gall (RETIRED) 2004-04-25 19:47:53 UTC]

let it float off in the distance... ignored.

[Comment 4 Martin Schlemmer (RETIRED) 2004-04-26 15:56:11 UTC]

Anybody tried 3.3.3-r3 on ppc to see if there has been some changes for
the better?  I am not sure we want to anybody to get stuck with 3.4 right
now ...

[Comment 5 Philippe Trottier (RETIRED) 2004-05-29 03:16:02 UTC]

I have been using gcc-3.3.3-r3 with very good success, I compiled a lot of stuff with it and it produces proper kernel. It doesn't have the -mcpu=G5 and that about the only minus.

[Comment 6 Tom Gall (RETIRED) 2004-05-29 09:12:22 UTC]

The "problem" here is that as I understand Alan's work which has been going into the 3.3-hammer branch will never make it's way to the 3.3.x mainline. So hammer is  somewhat of a dead end. Tho the same work is mirrored into 3.4 and THAT is making it into the mainline. So at least good news on that front. 

I've got 20040420 marked as stable for ppc64 now. That's a good compiler.

[Comment 7 Tom Gall (RETIRED) 2004-05-29 09:15:45 UTC]

sorry make that 20040408!