Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 15:04:45 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Johan Venter <jventer AT writeme DOT com>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Installing DJGPP
In-Reply-To: <M2St3.130$ei1.493@newsfeeds.bigpond.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990818150131.10490M-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Mon, 16 Aug 1999, Johan Venter wrote:

> Eli, you told me earlier that the conflicting copies of cxxfilt were
> identical files. This is in fact untrue, as I've just reinstalled djgpp and
> unzipped everything again.

No, I didn't say that.  At least I didn't mean to say that; if I confused 
you, I apologize.

What I meant to say is that these two are virtually identical programs, 
but they were compiled with different versions of the underlying 
libraries, that's why the binaries differ.  From the user point of view, 
there's no difference which one to use.

> >From gpp295b.zip:
> cxxfilt.exe is 157, 302 bytes.

I never talked about cxxfilt from GCC 2.95, the previous thread about 
these problems compared cxxfilt from Binutils 2.8.1 and GCC 2.8.1.  I 
guess the version from GCC 2.95 *is* different.