>>>>> "Tim" == Tim Riker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Tim> Alan Cox wrote: >> > 1. There are architectures where some other compiler may do >> better > optimizations than gcc. I will cite some examples here, no >> need to argue >> >> I think we only care about this when they become free software. Tim> This may be your belief, but I would not choose to enforce it on Tim> everyone. Thank you for you opinion. Then don't try to enforce proprietary compilers on the kernel developers either. It's the developers who write the kernel and they use gcc extensions. There is no reason to cripple the kernel to satisfy people who wants to use proprietary software to compile it - not our problem. Jes - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go ... Alan Cox
- Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go ... Tim Riker
- Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go ... Alan Cox
- Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go ... Andi Kleen
- Re: non-gcc linux? Tim Riker
- Re: non-gcc linux? Andi Kleen
- Re: non-gcc linux? Tim Riker
- Re: non-gcc linux? Gábor Lénárt
- Re: non-gcc linux? Kai Henningsen
- Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go ... Kai Henningsen
- Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go ... Jes Sorensen
- Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go ... Tim Riker
- Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go ... Richard B. Johnson
- Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go ... David Lang
- Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go ... Richard B. Johnson
- Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go ... Andi Kleen
- Re: non-gcc linux? Tim Riker
- Re: non-gcc linux? Andrea Arcangeli
- Re: non-gcc linux? Tim Riker
- Re: non-gcc linux? Andrea Arcangeli
- Re: non-gcc linux? D. Hugh Redelmeier