[clug] ALPHA distribution needed. (long)

[Simon Fowler]

On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 08:35:54PM +1100, Duncan Roe wrote:
> I distrust all gcc 2.96.* that came with redhats. They were not GNU releases,
> rather they were redhat "specials".
> 
Actually, after the teething issues were sorted out they were quite
good compilers . . . Particularly for C++ code.

> Obtain the source for gcc2.95.3 and build it (just follow the README, it's much
> easier then it used to be).
> 
Yeah, that's also quite a good compiler ;-) You might want to try
2.95.4, though, since I think that was the last of the 2.95 series.
It's only recently been taken off the list of recommended compilers
for 2.6 - any 2.4 kernel should be quite happy with it.

Simon

-- 
PGP public key Id 0x144A991C, or http://himi.org/stuff/himi.asc
(crappy) Homepage: http://himi.org
doe #237 (see http://www.lemuria.org/DeCSS) 
My DeCSS mirror: ftp://himi.org/pub/mirrors/css/ 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/linux/attachments/20040114/d4d6f7f4/attachment.bin