Martin Waller wrote:
Read /usr/doc/gcc/README.Debian .
I did but was still confused :(
It didn't say *why* we have an apparent fork in compiler development.
Since the gcc compiler is at the core of Linux (behind only the kernel
itself in importance), having a semi-permanent
On Wed, Dec 09, 1998 at 00:13:16 -0500, Ed Cogburn wrote:
Read /usr/doc/gcc/README.Debian .
It didn't say *why* we have an apparent fork in compiler development.
It doesn't contain a full history of the free software movement either, as
that's out of scope for that document too.
Since the
Subject: Re: g++2.8, egcs, gcc 2.7.2, etc. - *very confused*
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin Waller)
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 16:30:50 +1100 (EST)
Cc: debian-user@lists.debian.org
From: Jiri Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello,
Over the weekend, I downlaoded V 1.20 onto /usr/local/.
Did the same last
Hello,
Over the weekend, I downlaoded V 1.20 onto /usr/local/.
Did the same last night.
I tried compiling it and after finding out that I needed all the OpenGl
stuff and isntalling that to (V. annoying by the way - had even to edit some
of the source code to get rid of those probelms)
I
Hi,
I am stunningly confused about the whole c and c++ suite thing that's
going on (I'm still in HAMM - it's *not * the __register_frame_info
stuff!).
Here's my story and a plea for a clear explanation of what's what and
what I need to compile kernels, c++ toolkits and stuff.
Over the
On Mon, Dec 07, 1998 at 01:50:48 -0800, Martin Waller wrote:
I am stunningly confused about the whole c and c++ suite thing that's
going on (I'm still in HAMM - it's *not * the __register_frame_info
stuff!).
Read /usr/doc/gcc/README.Debian .
Being naive enough to try anything, and having
Read /usr/doc/gcc/README.Debian .
I did but was still confused :(
Being naive enough to try anything, and having heard of all sorts of
problems with egcs and g++, I decided to scrap g++2.8 and put
g++2.7.2 on.
(I had egcs 2.90.29, dated 19980515).
g++2.7.2 is intended only for compiling
7 matches
Mail list logo