On Fri, 2001-12-21 at 20:54, Paolo Alexis Falcone wrote:
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> >

> sure RH is the pioneer here. But I can't see enough excuse on branching to a
> "gcc 2.96" in RH 7.0, despite master hacker Alan Cox et al from RH says,
> when gcc-3.0 was to be released just a few months later. I don't know if they
> should've just waited then, instead of releasing a compiler that would produce
> code that's neither forward or backward compatible. Anyway thanks to RH for
> all their invaluable contributions to the Linux community...

ah the real reason behind with 2.96 was that bash wont compile on s390

<snip> and they wanted IA64 support ASAP (business reasons). Oh, and GCC
2.95 miscompiles bash on the s390 architecture (there is no RedHat
distribution for s390..) 
</snip>

ahh sorry i wrote on the other post it was as/400 bleh my bad 


-- 
-Dek
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" profile, don't speculate"

_
Philippine Linux Users Group. Web site and archives at http://plug.linux.org.ph
To leave: send "unsubscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To subscribe to the Linux Newbies' List: send "subscribe" in the body to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to