> You're telling me that I (currently) have to build it from source, right ?
> That is, unlike gcc and g++, there's currently no Vista binary available for
> g77 ?
I'm saying that someone -- perhaps you, perhaps someone else -- simply
needs to rebuild gcc. What I was trying to convey is that the work is
already done to fix the bug, and in fact the fix is not gcc-specific at
all but applies to any application that tries to use _access() with
X_OK, a bitvalue that has been deprecated for some time and MS just got
around to removing it finally. There could be other apps lurking out
there that use this idiom and thus the workaround code is in
> That's fair enough .... I mean, I don't know how to build g77 from source
> ... but that's *my* problem, and I certainly have no expectations that
> others should (or will) cater to my own personal failings.
> But I *will* continue to ask (politely) about this from time to time -
> unless, of course, such behaviour is deemed unacceptable. (I do subscribe to
> this list, but it's always possible that I've missed an announcement.)
That's a fair complaint. And in fact we should not have this "special
vista version of gcc" business, in an ideal world we'd just respin the
gcc packages and bump the release number, and then there would be no
more confusion. But as with all open source volunteer projects, nothing
happens without motivation from someone to do it, and if Danny is short
on time or busy with other projects or whatever then so be it; that's