> From: Bob McGowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> Thanks, Steven, I'll go ahead and submit the bug info, since the 
> compiler did say I should do so ;)  We'll see what happens.

        Can't hurt anything ;)

> Regarding the supposed "fix", the bugzilla page referenced indicates the 
> bug is 'Resolved' and comment 2 says "fixed".  Not being a C++ 

        Correct - I saw that too, then looking close it says under the 
        column "Fixed in Milestone" that it was fixed in "Beta 2".

        If it was fixed, then you've encountered a similar but different
        problem.  Or are you running something earlier than "Beta 2"?

> programmer, I made an erroneous assumption ;(  Thanks for the explanation.
> 
> >   https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=214880

        The file that  can be downloaded is a ".ii" file which looks like
        the preprocessed output.  This is done before code generation which
        is where the internal compiler error is happening.

        The .ii file simply is saying that the #includes, #defines, etc can
        be processed.

> I'm going to see about getting one of the compiler versions that works 
> installed, as I think I'd prefer to have the feature than not.

        g++ 4.0.2 which came with SuSE 10.0 works fine.  Oddly enough I have
        compiled mjpegtools with  g++ 4.1.0 on SuSE 10.1 but on a AMD64 system 
        and it  worked OK.  

        It would seem that there is a strange interaction between SuSE 10.2 
        and g++ 4.1.x

        Cheers,
        Steven Schultz


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Mjpeg-users mailing list
Mjpeg-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mjpeg-users

Reply via email to