Message-ID: <36FD5177.928D3534@lycosmail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 16:45:27 -0500
From: Adam Schrotenboer <ajschrotenboer AT lycosmail DOT com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: EGCS/PGCC 2.92.xx & up
References: <36F6B533 DOT 90C67274 AT lycosmail DOT com> <19990326191808 DOT C27528 AT tardis DOT ed DOT ac DOT uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

So does that mean that the snapshots don't get integrated into the
releases?
If so, I would guess that I should try to use the snapshots, assuming
that
I
can patch them to work w/ DJGPP. Well, maybe if I get the time, I'll end
up
providing the ports for DJGPP (Right now I get the EGCS sources, patch
to
PGCC, then run the EGCS DJGPP patch. However, this might not work for
the
snapshots)

Also, how related are the EGCS snapshots to the PGCC snapshots? Are the
PGCC snapshots a major fork from the EGCS snapshots? How related are the
EGCS snap
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.0.2i

iQA/AwUBNv1RYR8/zl3sumo2EQInowCgzkMkcgU49Je9Q20iTGJN4CDqyloAoLll
7dsg6eDbx4scsX3Isw4k18Gu
=CSqX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Mark Brown wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 22, 1999 at 04:25:07PM -0500, Adam Schrotenboer wrote:
>
> > I've been reading on this list about EGCS being at 2.93.xx. However, as
> > far as I can tell, it's still 2.91.xx. Even 1.1.2 is 2.91.66. Anybody
> > know what this is about????
>
> The 1.1 releases are forked from the main development tree, and only
> bugfix patches go into the new 1.1 releases.  The development continues
> on the mainline egcs sources, avalible as snapshots and from CVS and
> will be stabalized and released at some future point.
>
> --
> Mark Brown  mailto:broonie AT tardis DOT ed DOT ac DOT uk   (Trying to avoid grumpiness)
>             http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~broonie/
> EUFS        http://www.eusa.ed.ac.uk/societies/filsoc/