Alan Cox wrote: > > > > They released a supported ex-Cygnus people approved compiler. > > > > Which still makes it an broken, experimental, unreleased and unofficial > > compiler, with all the consequences I said. > > And didnt you write something called pgcc once. And then there isn't anything I could see which would prohibit anybody from taking gcc-2.96 and ship it in any distro they wish too. Alan you are in full right here the gcc-2.96 DOES a significantly *better* job on in esp. C++ for example then any other gcc before - at least on the arch's which really matter those days. The PGCC never really worked. In fact on TeX at least it generated worder code then the plain gcc-2.7.3 those day's.... - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Harald Dunkel
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Jes Sorensen
- Re: Standard Linux (Was What is up with Redhat 7.0?... Michael Peddemors
- Re: Standard Linux (Was What is up with Redhat 7.0?... Marc Lehmann
- Re: Standard Linux (Was What is up with Redhat 7.0?... Alexander Viro
- Re: Standard Linux (Was What is up with Redhat 7.0?... Alan Cox
- Re: Standard Linux (Was What is up with Redhat 7.0?... Jesse Pollard
- Re: Standard Linux (Was What is up with Redhat 7.0?... Gary Lawrence Murphy
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Martin Dalecki
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Michael Meding
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Martin Dalecki
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Bernhard Rosenkraenzer
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Jamie Lokier
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Bernhard Rosenkraenzer
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Matti Aarnio
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Marc Lehmann
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Jamie Lokier
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Igmar Palsenberg
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Martin Dalecki
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Nix
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Marc Lehmann