> On Wed, 30 May 2001, Allan Rae wrote:
<message Allan wwas responding to snipped>
> Actually we could perhaps provide a warning message like:
>
> Are you serious? GCC-2.96 is unofficial crap!
>
... and the current version number the mainline gcc sources claim to be is
3,1. I use 3.1 regularly and have the CVS version of gcc 2.95.x for cases when
gcc 3.x dumps core. gcc 2.96 sounds like a way of having mainline gcc with
some fixed bugs unfixxed in your version, and reportedly binary compatibility
problems. Stuff compiled with a mixture of gcc 3.x and gcc 2.95.x seems to
work fine for me...
I guess an update will appear fairly soon anyway as an official release of gcc
3.0 is reportedly scheduled for the near future. Hopefully RH et al will put
out a gcc update shortly after that release appears.
--
Duncan (-:
"software industry, the: unique industry where selling substandard goods is
legal and you can charge extra for fixing the problems."
