Personally I use gcc 3.0.3 or 3.0.4, I've yet to have things happen
which cannot be explained.
On Thu, 2002-03-21 at 14:04, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On Thu, 2002-03-21 at 13:50, z@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > | gcc-2.96-101 with good success. I think that 2.95.x is not so good.
> > 2.95.x not so good? That's a little scary to me...
> > could you explain why you feel that way?
> > | I _really_ hope that some day this question can go away. :)
> > I'll second that...
> xfs exposed some bugs in the 2.95 series, there were reports of 2.95.2
> miscompiling, 2.95.3 may be better...
> Eric Sandeen XFS for Linux http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs
> sandeen@xxxxxxx SGI, Inc.
Systems Architect, CCNA
"It is the part of a good shepherd to shear his flock, not to skin it."