Re: affs

[Michel <da...@re...>]

Ken Tyler wrote:

> > Yes, they are and I just commited some more changes, but there is still a
> > bit to do. OFS is probably still completly broken and FFS writes stop
> > somewhere at 4.5MB (the extended block caching is broken).
> > It would be great if someone could test the current stuff a bit, but
> > please do any tests only on a seperate partition or only with a backup. I
> > don't have disksalv or something like that, so I can't really test if the
> > fs structure is still consistent.
> 
> I just updated 2.3 and attempted to compile, I see :
> 
> gcc  blah -c -o signal.o signal.c
> signal.c: In function `do_sigaction':
> signal.c:921: fixed or forbidden register 68 (0) was spilled for class
> CR0_REGS.
> This may be due to a compiler bug or to impossible asm
> statements or clauses.
> make[2]: *** [signal.o] Error 1

Which compiler do you use?

AFAIK even Linus uses egcs-1.1.2 now *grin*

I'm using gcc 2.95.2 ...


Michel


-- 
Me? A skeptic? Can you prove it?
______________________________________________________________________________
Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)  \  CS student and free software enthusiast
Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \   member of XFree86, Team *AMIGA*, AUGS