> > -- Phil Blundell's 2.95.2 gcc patch doesn't apply cleanly, but I looked
> > at the patch, and the changes look reasonable (right direction,
> > likely bug fixes, etc). The top-level stuff (ChangeLog, configure,
> > configure.in) will get rejected; the other stuff patches cleanly,
> > although I had to supply a path to each file.
> > -- The fold-const.c patch looks like it's still needed (it hasn't been
> > applied in 2.95.2).
>
> To be honest I don't really remember what the status of the 2.95.2 patch is.
> I think there is a "2.95.3" patch in my directory on netwinder.org that might
> be slightly better. That should also apply against 2.95.2 without too many
> problems.
To be quite honest, I think the best source of patches for gcc is my source RPM
on netwinder.org. I spent a great deal of time organizing and documenting
them. AFAIK, they are fully up to date.
Scott
--
Scott Bambrough - Software Engineer
REBEL.COM http://www.rebel.com
NetWinder http://www.netwinder.org
unsubscribe: body of `unsubscribe linux-arm' to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
++ Please use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for ++
++ kernel-related discussions. ++
