Re: ..gcc-3.x.y & RH7.z, was: [Plib-users] Fwd: Re: flightgear problem

[Arnt K. <ar...@c2...>]

"Trond Eivind Glomsrød" wrote:
> 
> Arnt Karlsen <ar...@c2...> writes:
> 
> > On Sun, 26 Aug 2001 00:10:59 -0500,
> > Steve Baker <sjb...@ai...>
> > wrote in <3B8...@ai...>:
> >
> > > pieter bonne wrote:
> > > >

..[...bg & defense snipped...]

> > ..how about Red Hat 7.z/Rawhide and gcc 3.x.y?   TEG?
> > Will gcc version 3 onwards fix the Red Hat 7.z "gcc-2.96/7" problem?
> 
> This isn't a software proplem, it's as people problem. Lack of
> knowledge can be an inflammatory thing.
> 
> 2.96RH will of course remain the standard compiler through the 7.x
> series. For the next major series, we intend to move to gcc 3 if it's
> mature enough at the time (if not, it'll just be another 7.x,
> probably).

..agreed.  Ok.  Meanwhile, just how do I get Flightgear running?


On Mon, 27 Aug 2001 03:04:09 -0500, Steve Baker <sjb...@ai...>
wrote in <3B8...@ai...>:

> Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> >
> > ..how about Red Hat 7.z/Rawhide and gcc 3.x.y?   TEG?
> > Will gcc version 3 onwards fix the Red Hat 7.z "gcc-2.96/7" problem?
> 
> Well, it's possible that there will be problems with GCC 3.0 - and I've
> had mixed reports (at least one person said that they had weird problems
> and two people said that it "just worked" except for a couple of places
> where I had #include'd the wrong header files for some standard functions
> and had been "getting away with it".  eg <sys/time.h> and <time.h>)
> 
> So whether 3.0 will be good or not - I don't know.  I generally avoid
> "x.0.0" releases - I don't have the energy to chase compiler problems
> and I'd rather a few hundred thousand other people found the hard problems
> before I give them a whirl.
> 
> However, that misses the point.  2.96/7 were never actually released
> by the GCC team - so it's unreasonable to email them saying "you screwed
> up Mesa - please fix it"...however, if 3.0 screws up Mesa then it's
> perfectly reasonable (even desirable) to enter into a dialog with the
> Mesa team and the GCC team to try to figure out what's going on.
> 
> So if you have problems with 2.96/7, you shouldn't complain to PLIB
> or Mesa or even the GCC team because the fault doesn't lie with any
> of those groups.  That only leaves RedHat's customer support.


..who I guess needs help identifying the problems.

 
> ----------------------------- Steve Baker -------------------------------
> HomeMail : <sjb...@ai...>   WorkMail: <sj...@li...>
> HomePage : http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
> Projects : http://plib.sf.net       http://tuxaqfh.sf.net
>            http://prettypoly.sf.net http://tuxkart.sf.net
>            http://freeglut.sf.net   http://toobular.sf.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> plib-users mailing list
> pli...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plib-users
> 

..ps: TEG, jeg fwd'er svaret ditt til plib-lista, du glemte den.

-- 
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-)

  Scenarios always come in sets of three: 
  best case, worst case, and just in case.