From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261404AbVG1MAQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jul 2005 08:00:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261411AbVG1MAQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jul 2005 08:00:16 -0400 Received: from emailhub.stusta.mhn.de ([141.84.69.5]:53266 "HELO mailout.stusta.mhn.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261404AbVG1MAO (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jul 2005 08:00:14 -0400 Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 14:00:12 +0200 From: Adrian Bunk To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: RFC: Raise required gcc version to 3.2 ? Message-ID: <20050728120012.GB3528@stusta.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org What is the oldest gcc we want to support in kernel 2.6? Currently, it's 2.95 . I'd suggest raising this to 3.2 which should AFAIK not be a problem for any distribution supporting kernel 2.6 . Is there any good reason why we should not drop support for older compilers? cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed