Date:	Wed, 27 Oct 1999 13:22:47 +0200 (IST)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	pavenis AT lanet DOT lv
cc:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: gcc-2.95.2
In-Reply-To:	<B0000106605@stargate.astr.lu.lv>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.991027131905.28265E-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Wed, 27 Oct 1999 pavenis AT lanet DOT lv wrote:

> One change is that -fstrict-aliasing is no more enabled by default (I 
> myself put '%{!no-strict-aliasing: -fstrict-aliasing}' in specs to
> have that still enabled).

Is this a good idea?  If the GCC maintainers decided to not enforce 
strict aliasing, why should we?  AFAIK, this feature can subtly break 
lots of code.

> One question: do we still need gcc-2.95 related files in DJGPP 
> distribution?

Probably not.  But I'd suggest to leave it on SimTel until 2.95.2 is 
uploaded.  With such a high rate of releasing new versions, we don't
have enough confidence in the current version, so it's good to have a 
fallback.

I understand that 2.95.3 is expected in a few (8-10) weeks.

- Raw text -