Re: gcc-3.0 packages in incoming

2001-06-19 Thread Matthias Klose
Christopher C. Chimelis writes: > Do we really need the doxygen part anyway? It's not compilable on Alpha > unless we use gcc-3.0 anyway (and even then, it's untested...it's that bad > C++ problem with 2.95.x that kept it from working from what I can tell). It's not needed for the binary-arch

Re: gcc-3.0 packages in incoming

2001-06-18 Thread Christopher C. Chimelis
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Matthias Klose wrote: > here we go ... The packages are in incoming, built for i386, hppa > patch checked, libgcc symlink corrected. > > known issues: > > - doxygen segfaults generating the libstdc++-v3 docs (1.3.6 worked > ok). results in an empty html_user dir. > > - t

gcc-3.0 packages in incoming

2001-06-18 Thread Matthias Klose
here we go ... The packages are in incoming, built for i386, hppa patch checked, libgcc symlink corrected. known issues: - doxygen segfaults generating the libstdc++-v3 docs (1.3.6 worked ok). results in an empty html_user dir. - the subreg-byte patch applies, but misses the two texi files (mo