Quoth Net Llama!: > On Mon, 7 Jul 2003, Kurt Wall wrote: > > > Is there any reason to keep the old version of gcc around, other than for > > > the random stuff that still won't buld right on gcc-3.x? > > > > I'd keep it around until you're sure the new one works. > > Do you know of a list of stuff that is known not to build with gcc-3.x?
The kernel doesn't usually build with 3.3. I'm not aware of anything else, but I just started playing with it. > > <plug mode="shameless"> > > If all else fails, see http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=187 > > when it comes out. ;-) > > </plug> > > I don't suppose it will be out later this afternoon, will it? ;) Um, no, I'm afraid not. The publisher wishes it were so, that's for sure. Kurt -- Chemicals, n.: Noxious substances from which modern foods are made. _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
