X-POP3-Rcpt:	mlehmann AT universe DOT sgh-net DOT de
Message-ID:	<19980125213610.03895@cerebro.laendle>
25 Jan 1998 21:36:10 +0100 :
From:	Marc Lehmann <pcg AT goof DOT com>
To:	Andrew J Prowant <ajpst27+@pitt.edu>
Cc:	beastium <beastium-list AT Desk DOT nl>
Subject:	Re: PGCC and GCC 2.8?
References:	<Pine DOT GSO DOT 3 DOT 96L DOT 980125123525 DOT 2857B-100000 AT unixs4 DOT cis DOT pitt DOT edu>
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Mailer:	Mutt 0.88
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.GSO.3.96L.980125123525.2857B-100000@unixs4.cis.pitt.edu>; from Andrew J Prowant on Sun, Jan 25, 1998 at 12:37:28PM -0500
X-Operating-System:	Linux version 2.1.81 (root AT cerebro) (gcc version pgcc-2.91.05 980122 (gcc-2.8.0 release))
Status:	RO
Lines:	19

On Sun, Jan 25, 1998 at 12:37:28PM -0500, Andrew J Prowant wrote:
> Hi, I just joined the list and I was wondering if there are any plans for
> a PGCC release based off of GCC 2.8?  Or is there no reason to? 

No, I don't like gcc-2.8.0 for a number of reasons, including performance
stability and management.

egcs should be as stable, fast and portable as gcc-2.8.0.

Is there a specific reason you need a release based on gcc-2.8.0?
I cannot think of any...

      -----==-                                              |
      ----==-- _                                            |
      ---==---(_)__  __ ____  __       Marc Lehmann       +--
      --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /       pcg AT goof DOT com       |e|
      -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\                          --+
    The choice of a GNU generation                        |
                                                          |

- Raw text -