X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
From: rugxulo AT gmail DOT com
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: DJGPP port of GCC-4.2.2
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 19:23:29 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <1193279009.974354.181370@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com>
References: <200710240432 DOT l9O4WuBL003084 AT delorie DOT com>
   <471ED81E DOT B009631F AT yahoo DOT com>
   <200710241346 DOT 36895 DOT andris DOT pavenis AT iki DOT fi>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.13.115.246
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1193279010 3268 127.0.0.1 (25 Oct 2007 02:23:30 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse AT google DOT com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 02:23:30 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <200710241346.36895.andris.pavenis@iki.fi>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Opera/9.24 (Windows NT 6.0; U; en),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse AT google DOT com
Injection-Info: y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com; posting-host=65.13.115.246;
   posting-account=ps2QrAMAAAA6_jCuRt2JEIpn5Otqf_w0
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

On Oct 24, 5:46 am, Andris Pavenis <andris DOT pave DOT  DOT  DOT  AT iki DOT fi> wrote:
> On Wednesday 24 October 2007 08:29:02 am CBFalconer wrote:
>
>
>
> > Andris Pavenis wrote:
> > > This is announcement of DJGPP port of GCC-4.2.2
>
> > .. snip ...
>
> > > =======================================
> > > Build for current stable version of DJGPP (djdev203 patchlevel 2)
> > > is available from:
> > >    ftp://ftp.delorie.com/pub/djgpp/current/v2gnu/
> > > and mirror sites (seehttp://www.delorie.com/djgpp/getting.html)
>
> > > ada421b.zip     GNU Ada compiler 4.2.2 for DJGPP V2
>
> >      ^^^
>
> > >    ftp://ftp.delorie.com/pub/djgpp/current/v2gnu/ada421b.zip
>
> >                                                       ^^^
> > Shouldn't these '421's all be '422'?  Lots more unquoted.
>
> They should. Sorry...

Yes, obviously, just a typo, no worries.

BTW, thanks for the port!!   :-)