On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Kurt Wall wrote: > Feigning erudition, Net Llama! wrote: > % On 01/29/03 19:42, Kurt Wall wrote: > % >Feigning erudition, Net Llama! wrote: > % >% > % >% Redhat-7.0 had a seriously broken gcc implimentation. 8.0 has a beta > % >% release of glibc. All the intermediate releases had no such problems, > % >% and use standards compliant releases of gcc & glibc. > % > > % >I beg your pardon, but Red Hat 7.3 still used GCC 2.96: > % >$ rpm -q redhat-release > % >redhat-release-7.3-1 > % >$ rpm -q gcc > % >gcc-2.96-110 > % > % so? > > The GCC project never released 2.96. It was a Red Hat thing. While > it might have been "standards compliant" in the sense that it emitted > code the complies with ANSI/ISO C and C++ standard, it was certainly > not an official GCC release.
Once again, so? That doesn't mean that its not gcc, or that the code it produces won't run on other boxes. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Lonni J Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux Step-by-step & TyGeMo http://netllama.ipfox.com _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
