| www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
| X-pop3-spooler: | POP3MAIL 2.1.0 b 4 980420 -bs- |
| Delivered-To: | pcg AT goof DOT com |
| Message-ID: | <19980513130604.54576@cerebro.laendle> |
| Date: | Wed, 13 May 1998 13:06:04 +0200 |
| From: | Marc Lehmann <pcg AT goof DOT com> |
| To: | nuke AT bayside DOT net, beastium-list AT Desk DOT nl |
| Subject: | Re: pgcc vs AMD K6 |
| Mail-Followup-To: | nuke AT bayside DOT net, beastium-list AT Desk DOT nl |
| References: | <199805122110 DOT XAA20479 AT unknown DOT ruhr DOT de> <Pine DOT LNX DOT 3 DOT 96 DOT 980513074927 DOT 29896C-100000 AT nuklear DOT steelcity DOT net> |
| Mime-Version: | 1.0 |
| In-Reply-To: | <Pine.LNX.3.96.980513074927.29896C-100000@nuklear.steelcity.net>; from nuke@bayside.net on Wed, May 13, 1998 at 07:50:32AM -0400 |
| X-Operating-System: | Linux version 2.1.101 (root AT cerebro) (gcc version pgcc-2.91.28 19980508 (gcc2 ss-980502 experimental)) |
| Status: | RO |
| Lines: | 25 |
On Wed, May 13, 1998 at 07:50:32AM -0400, nuke AT bayside DOT net wrote:
>
> is pgcc going the way of the wind? personally, i like the pentium
> improvements, but plain egcs has been much more stable and doesn't choke
> on c++.
You shouldn't use snapshots if you are unable to use/compile them (you
shouldn't use a 2.1 kernel if you can't cope with the problems, either).
pgcc-1.0+ will neither choke on C++ nor is it much less stable.
(or at least, you haven't reported any problems (well, you reported bugs in
the linux kernel to this list, but not in the pgcc releases), see the recent
thread on linux-kernel about the difference between "reporting" and
"complaining")
I love discussion. I even love flaming. But stating "facts" without evidence
(as you like to do recently) I hate most.
-----==- |
----==-- _ |
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +--
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg AT goof DOT com |e|
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ --+
The choice of a GNU generation |
|
| webmaster | delorie software privacy |
| Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |