> > They released a supported ex-Cygnus people approved compiler. > > Which still makes it an broken, experimental, unreleased and unofficial > compiler, with all the consequences I said. And didnt you write something called pgcc once. *PLONK* Alan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? braun
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Bernhard Rosenkraenzer
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Marc Lehmann
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Ulrich Drepper
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Marc Lehmann
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Igmar Palsenberg
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Alan Cox
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Marc Lehmann
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Alan Cox
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Marc Lehmann
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Alan Cox
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Marc Lehmann
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Jes Sorensen
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Marc Lehmann
- Re: What is up with Redhat 7.0? Jes Sorensen
- Why does everyone hate gcc 2.95? John Anthony Kazos Jr.
- Re: Why does everyone hate gcc 2.95? Larry McVoy
- Re: Why does everyone hate gcc 2.95? Alexander Viro
- Re: Why does everyone hate gcc 2.95? Jamie Lokier
- Re: Why does everyone hate gcc 2.95? Henning P. Schmiedehausen
- Re: Why does everyone hate gcc 2.95? Kim Shepherd