should I use gcc-2.95.3 for kernel compilation

shanenin · 02-01-2004, 10:31 PM

I asked a similar but different question in linux software. The question I asked their was if most distros use gcc-2.95.3 to compile the kernel.

Did you guys(LFS users) use gcc-2.95.3 to compile your kernel as the book instructs. Or is this overkill. Until LFS, I have never heard of such a thing. Any input would be appreciated.

cjcuk · 02-02-2004, 12:42 PM

I always use GCC 2.95.3 to compile the kernel, for the reasons that the book instructs.

qanopus · 02-04-2004, 03:14 PM

I didn't use gcc-2.95.3 to compile the kernel. To much trouble, to little gain. My system is rock solid even if I compiled the kernel with gcc-3

320mb · 07-21-2004, 11:15 PM

I found this thread an thought I would bring it up to date...........

I just completed LFS 5.1 and after installing the X-server and KDE,
I re-compiled the kernel using the current Gcc instead of v.2.95 and had no problems.....no errors and my New LFS is pretty stable
and boots up Fast......Faster than my Slackware boxes actually.........

shanenin · 07-21-2004, 11:23 PM

wow, you built X and KDE from scratch, what a big job. I quit after getting online with links, that was enough for me.

iluvatar · 07-23-2004, 03:43 AM

I used gcc-3.3.3 for compiling the 2.6.6 kernel... no problem here, tho I guess I had to install the 2.6.6 headers instead of the 2.4.26 headers before installing glibc in chapter 6?

anyway: as far as I know I haven't had any undetected errors so far...

greetz,
.-=~ iluvatar ~=-.

shanenin · 07-23-2004, 10:11 AM

I don't think it is reccomended to install the 2.6 kernel headers, even if you are running a 2.6 kernel. You still should compile glibc against the 2.4-kernel headers. Below is from the LFS FAQ

Quote:

Currently, you can't build an LFS system by using linux-2.6.x instead of linux-2.4.x. This is because the kernel headers from 2.6.x are incompatible with other programs in LFS-5.x and will lead to compile errors. It is recommended to use linux-2.4.x in your build until LFS releases a new version which includes the 2.6.x kernel; according to the roadmap this will be LFS-6.0.

After your system is built using the 2.4 headers, you can update your running kernel to any version you like.

kjordan · 07-24-2004, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by shanenin
I don't think it is reccomended to install the 2.6 kernel headers, even if you are running a 2.6 kernel. You still should compile glibc against the 2.4-kernel headers. Below is from the LFS FAQ

After your system is built using the 2.4 headers, you can update your running kernel to any version you like.

You use the linux-libc-headers as described in the unstable branch if you want to use 2.6 headers.

foo_bar_foo · 07-25-2004, 10:15 PM

I have P4 so compiled my kernel 2.6.3 with icc instead of any of the gnu compilers
LFS 5.0
zoom zoom

mdh · 07-25-2004, 10:24 PM

For LFS 5.x (kernel 2.4.x) on ix86 hardware you can pretty much get away with using gcc of your choice.
There are no real issues with using gcc-3.3.3.

On other architectures YMMV

If you are against a 2.6.x kernel and using glibc w nptl, some nptl testsuites will segfault if the
running 2.6.x kernel was compiled with 2.95.3. This however doesn't mean your glibc is borked.

That said, current (2.6.7) x86_64 kernel appears rock solid when built with gcc-3.4.1

Regards
[R]