John R. Daily writes: > I sent this to the debian-ia64 list recently and received no > input. Given the apparent lack of concern about making such a > change, I'd like to inquire on this list whether such a change > would be technically and politically feasible pre-woody. > > Matthias, I understand that your input is particularly crucial in > this matter. Any thoughts?
I want leave the final decision to Randolph Tausq, which does (?) the ia64 parts in gcc. > From: "John R. Daily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: debian-ia64@lists.debian.org > Subject: g77-3.0 vs. -2.96 > Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 16:42:48 -0500 > Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > During the porting process, I have come across at least two > packages, one of them significant, that caused internal compiler > errors with g77-2.96. One was lapack-dev, the other is r-base, > which I'm still working on. Both compile fine with g77-3.0. > > Since the motivation for using 2.96 instead of 3.0 pertains more > to C and C++, and since bug fixes for 2.96 are going to be > difficult to come by, what would people think about changing the > default to 3.0 for g77 on ia64? > > - -- > John R. Daily Progeny Linux Systems > Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Master of the ephemeral epiphany > > ------- End of Forwarded Message > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
