Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!usenet.coe.montana.edu!bsd.coe.montana.edu!nate From: nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu (Nate Williams) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.apps Subject: Re: gcc-2.5? Date: 29 Oct 1993 02:32:35 GMT Organization: Montana State University, Bozeman MT Lines: 27 Message-ID: <2apvc3$dj7@pdq.coe.montana.edu> References: <2apjmh$8ub@news.ysu.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: bsd.coe.montana.edu In article <2apjmh$8ub@news.ysu.edu>, Christopher L. Mikkelson <ap713@yfn.ysu.edu> wrote: > >Has anybody compiled/had trouble with compiling gcc-2.5.x on 386bsd? My advice to you is wait a little while. As someone said in another group, it took a while for gcc2.1 to be stable (gcc 2.2.2), gcc2.3 (gcc2.3.3), gcc2.4 (gcc2.4.4 or gcc2.4.5), so it'll be a little bit before I'd consider gcc2.5 to be stable (gcc2.5.5 :-) Also, this is not intended to be an insult to the GNU/FSF folks, but shipping a product that couldn't be compiled seems to point to a lack of pre-release testing. (But boy do I understand the problems of pre-release lack of testing, as some of the upgrade script users can testify). However, this doesn't answer your question, but I would recommend against using gcc2.5.0a (especially for the kernel). Nate -- nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu | Freely available *nix clones benefit everyone, nate@cs.montana.edu | so let's not compete with each other, let's work #: (406) 994-4836 | compete with folks who try to tie us down to home #: (406) 586-0579 | proprietary O.S.'s (Microsloth) - Me