Dan Nicholson wrote:
> On 4/24/06, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 04/22/06 12:45 CST:
>>
>>> We have GCC-3.3.6 in the book. This would probably be adequate, but
>>> I'm wondering if we shouldn't add GCC-3.4.6 to the book,
>> I just couldn't get excited about adding another version of GCC to
>> the book.
>
> I meant to reply before, but got sidetracked. Wiki sounds fine to me.
> I don't think there are many people using the Fortran compiler. I'm
> curious, though. Why do we have 3.3.6 in the book? Also, which gcc
> version provides libstdc++.so.5? Whoops, maybe I should look at the
> book. I agree with your Wiki pointing completely now. I was going to
> suggest replacing 3.3.6 with 3.4.6, but that wouldn't work.
I agree that the wiki is the right place. We can't overcome the lack of
maintenance of packages in the book. Leaving one old copy of gcc in
the book is OK because it shows users how to have multiple copies of
gcc. We might want to mention in the gcc pages how to enable FORTRAN
and other gcc languages in the 3.3.6 page. I do think Ada is beyond the
scope of BLFS.
BTW, FORTRAN (not FORTRAN II, IV, 66, 77, or 90) was my first language.
WRITE(6,55) A, B, I
55 FORMAT(1H1, F8.3, F6.2, I5)
Who knows what the 1H1 is? :)
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
