required gcc for 2.3

[Jack Howarth]

Ulrich,
   How rigid is the requirement for gcc 3.2 to build glibc 2.3?
I noticed that was stated in the current INSTALL. In general I
think that is a very good thing to have there. However on debian
we have a slew of arches which have not been properly tested
for their need of a sysdeps/<arch>/libgcc-compat.c (to provide
libgcc symbols that went .hidden in gcc > 3.1). I have proposed
to the debian glibc maintainers that, as a temporary workaround, 
we just build those questionable arches on a gcc < 3.1 until
the libgcc-compat situation is resolved. Do you forsee any
major problems which such an approach? I was hoping that any 
issues this might cause would be caught in make check, no? 
              Thanks in advance for any guidance on this.
                                             Jack