David Vos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I was referring to: > http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-2.96.html
It is a separately maintained branch, and currently the best one available - gcc3 was both very delayed and rushed. Also, gcc3 is binary compatible with all other gcc releases (including 2.96RH) for C++ so using it wouldn't be an option even if it was ready. See http://www.bero.org/gcc296.html for other details. > I guess "beta" is still the wrong word, but I have run into several > problems with that compiler (e.g. MPICH or LINDA). I haven't looked at LINDA, but mpich had bugs which I fixed - there weren't compiler bugs, just 2.96RH being a lot stricter (gcc 3 wouldn't help in that way), -- Trond Eivind Glomsr�d Red Hat, Inc. _______________________________________________ Seawolf-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/seawolf-list
