delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f |
X-Authentication-Warning: | new-smtp2.ihug.com.au: Host p73-tnt7.syd.ihug.com.au [203.173.144.73] claimed to be acceleron |
Message-ID: | <003701c185c1$1b6e4b80$0102a8c0@acceleron> |
From: | "Andrew Cottrell" <acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au> |
To: | <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com> |
References: | <200112151952 DOT UAA11697 AT father DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se> |
Subject: | Re: GCC build with 2.03 refresh OK (Win2K, WinXP) - Ready for ? |
Date: | Sun, 16 Dec 2001 10:34:26 +1100 |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
X-Priority: | 3 |
X-MSMail-Priority: | Normal |
X-Mailer: | Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 |
X-MimeOLE: | Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 |
Reply-To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
> According to Charles Sandmann: > > there. I just would prefer not to delay the refresh on this issue. > > There's one report of trouble with WIN95 (Subject: cc1plus.exe: Cannot > allocate 65536 bytes after allocating XXXXX bytes in c.o.m.d) which > might be a problem with the refresh. > > Has anyone tried the refreshed binaries on a WIN95A system? I re-built all the packages at clio using the 2.03 refresh from the other week on a Win 98 box and the only issues I spotted were caused by me using the wrong batch file to re-build all of the packages (I used the batch file to build all of the new packages, including alpha versions) > Has anyone tried the refreshed binaries in plain DOZE for that matter? I don't have any plans for this at the moment.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |