Re: gcc-2.95.2-51 is buggy

["Jeff V. Merkey" <jmerkey@vger.timpanogas.org>]

On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 03:26:15PM -0200, Rik van Riel wrote:

Rik,

We refuse to use it here at present.  Builds from it have a lot
of problems, for some reason.  Andre is looking into it more 
deeply than I, but I agree with your assessment.

Jeff


> On Fri, 24 Nov 2000, Neil Brown wrote:
> > On Friday November 24, Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl wrote:
> > > >> ... RedHat's GCC snapshot "2.96" handles this case just fine.
> > > 
> > > > Now, if you can isolate the relevant part of the diff between
> > > > 2.95.2 and RH 2.96...
> > > 
> > > Maybe I have to be more precise in the statement "gcc 2.95.2 is buggy".
> 
> 	[image from FTP site not buggy]
> 
> > > This is from a SuSE distribution, I forget which, not very recent.
> > > Revised summary: gcc-2.95.2-51 from SuSE is buggy.
> > 
> > Ditto for gcc-2.95.2-13 from Debian (potato). It exhibits the
> > same bug. Debian applies a total of 49 patches to gcc and the
> > libraries.
> 
> The gcc-2.95.2-6cl from Conectiva 6.0 is buggy too.
> 
> (and the ISO images haven't even been available for
> one week yet ... *sigh*)
> 
> regards,
> 
> Rik
> --
> Hollywood goes for world dumbination,
> 	Trailer at 11.
> 
> http://www.conectiva.com/		http://www.surriel.com/
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/