On 3/28/06, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "Required patch: ..." > > I'm not sure what there is we can do to make it more clear that it > is a required patch. The name of the patch should be irrelevant. I > suppose the description part of the patch header could be updated, > but that, to me, is secondary to the book saying that it is a > "required patch".
This was brought up a while back. The patch name needs to be changed to indicate gcc4. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
