On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Grant Grundler wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 08:11:46PM +0300, Martin-?ric Racine wrote:
> > Wasn't PALO (the bootloader) also build-dependant upon 3.0 at some point?
>
> Not really. It was a coincendence palo built with gcc 3.0 worked
> and palo built with later gcc didn'
On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 08:11:46PM +0300, Martin-?ric Racine wrote:
> Wasn't PALO (the bootloader) also build-dependant upon 3.0 at some point?
Not really. It was a coincendence palo built with gcc 3.0 worked
and palo built with later gcc didn't. The bug was in palo and I'm
pretty sure paul fixed
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Matthew Wilcox writes:
> > On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 07:08:36PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > > hppa is the only platform with gcc-3.0/g++-3.0. Is this version still
> > > needed for hppa builds, or can it be removed? On all other platforms,
> > > we j
Matthew Wilcox writes:
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 07:08:36PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > hppa is the only platform with gcc-3.0/g++-3.0. Is this version still
> > needed for hppa builds, or can it be removed? On all other platforms,
> > we just build the libstdc++ runtime library (but doesn't s
On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 07:08:36PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> hppa is the only platform with gcc-3.0/g++-3.0. Is this version still
> needed for hppa builds, or can it be removed? On all other platforms,
> we just build the libstdc++ runtime library (but doesn't seem to be
> needed, I haven't s
hppa is the only platform with gcc-3.0/g++-3.0. Is this version still
needed for hppa builds, or can it be removed? On all other platforms,
we just build the libstdc++ runtime library (but doesn't seem to be
needed, I haven't seen third party software referencing this libstdc++
library version).
6 matches
Mail list logo