Moreover, I've had real problems getting server side C code to run, let alone
C++ code !! with 2.96. In order to get existing code to work (not even new
code !) for web page rendering I had to go back to Mandrake 2.95. I've been
dreading Mandrake going 'up' to 2.96. I've had a bug report to this
At the risk of sounding stupid - what are you talking about?
gcc -version gives me
2.95.3
On Sat, 07 Oct 2000, you wrote:
Moreover, I've had real problems getting server side C code to run, let
alone C++ code !! with 2.96. In order to get existing code to work (not
even new code !) for web
I think I just misunderstood what you were saying, I thought you said 2.96
was in there. I would agree with that stance if any distro pulled what redhat
did especially now that gcc's stance is known I'd have to go debian or
something. I don't think mandrake would make that move though.
I've
Yo,
On Sun, Oct 08, 2000 at 07:39:12AM -0400, Jason Straight wrote:
I think I just misunderstood what you were saying, I thought you said 2.96
was in there. I would agree with that stance if any distro pulled what redhat
did especially now that gcc's stance is known I'd have to go debian or
On Tue, Oct 03, 2000 at 05:34:35PM +0800, Geoffrey Lee wrote:
hackgcc is only in contribs. Once upon a time, Chmouel put it in for main
but it was too unstable so we reverted to 2.95.
While I prefer 2.95, too, I wonder if this has consequences on binary
compatibility. As far as I know, C code
During the bombing raid of Sat, 7 Oct 2000 13:26:13 +0200, somebody heard
Jan Niehusmann mumble in fear:
On Tue, Oct 03, 2000 at 05:34:35PM +0800, Geoffrey Lee wrote:
hackgcc is only in contribs. Once upon a time, Chmouel put it in for main
but it was too unstable so we reverted to 2.95.
Yo.
On Mon, Oct 02, 2000 at 11:35:26PM -0600, Prana wrote:
I'd be really glad if we can still use gcc-2.95.2-7mdk instead of 2.96.
According to rumors on Slashdot (read RedHat 7.0 review), it seems that
it's the gcc-2.96 is the "Beta" one. I would rather use an older but a
more stable
Prana [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd be really glad if we can still use gcc-2.95.2-7mdk instead of 2.96.
According to rumors on Slashdot (read RedHat 7.0 review), it seems that
it's the gcc-2.96 is the "Beta" one. I would rather use an older but a
more stable version. We have to maintain the
I'd be really glad if we can still use gcc-2.95.2-7mdk instead of 2.96.
According to rumors on Slashdot (read RedHat 7.0 review), it seems that
it's the gcc-2.96 is the "Beta" one. I would rather use an older but a
more stable version. We have to maintain the stability, security, and
ease of use
