delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Date: | Fri, 24 Aug 2001 11:10:28 -0400 |
Message-Id: | <200108241510.LAA11989@envy.delorie.com> |
X-Authentication-Warning: | envy.delorie.com: dj set sender to dj AT envy DOT delorie DOT com using -f |
From: | DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> |
To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
In-reply-to: | <3B8673CE.7807.117624D@localhost> (pavenis@lanet.lv) |
Subject: | Re: gcc-3.0.1 and Win2k |
References: | <3B8664C8 DOT 23360 DOT DCAE88 AT localhost> (pavenis AT lanet DOT lv) <3B8673CE DOT 7807 DOT 117624D AT localhost> |
Reply-To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
Errors-To: | nobody AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailing-List: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
> > Anyway, we must solve this problem somehow. The current situation is > > IMHO unacceptable. > > I think there is nothing bad of asking to have GCC and binutils > versions to be used to build DJGPP runtime be in a reasonable range. > We don't need to support older versions. I'm OK with saying that djgpp version Z is only supported with gcc version X and binutils version Y, or newer, if we must. I'm OK with saying gcc version A requires binutils version B or higher too. This is semi-standard practice elsewhere, we just need to make sure that the uninformed user does the right thing by default most of the time.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |