All,
I believe we've come to the conclusion to deprecate gcc 2.95.x support for GNUstep. To state it succintly, GNUstep shall support only gcc 3.x and greater.
Are there any objections, before this becomes official?
Later, GJC
--
Gregory John Casamento
I believe we've come to the conclusion to deprecate gcc 2.95.x support for GNUstep. To state it succintly, GNUstep shall support only gcc 3.x and greater.
Are there any objections, before this becomes official?
Later, GJC
--
Gregory John Casamento
----- Original Message ----
From: Helge Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Developer GNUstep <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 7:59:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Gnustep-cvs] GNUstep Testfarm Results
From: Helge Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Developer GNUstep <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 7:59:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Gnustep-cvs] GNUstep Testfarm Results
On Aug 11, 2006, at 12:27, Fred Kiefer wrote:
> and in many cases it is still faster than the later gcc
> releases.
I don't think thats true anymore for gcc4 and up. Not to mention PCH ...
libFoundation recently deprecated 2.95 support because those do not
support -fconstant-string-class.
Greets,
Helge
--
Helge Hess
http://docs.opengroupware.org/Members/helge/
_______________________________________________
Gnustep-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
> and in many cases it is still faster than the later gcc
> releases.
I don't think thats true anymore for gcc4 and up. Not to mention PCH ...
libFoundation recently deprecated 2.95 support because those do not
support -fconstant-string-class.
Greets,
Helge
--
Helge Hess
http://docs.opengroupware.org/Members/helge/
_______________________________________________
Gnustep-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
_______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
