Sender:	rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID:	<3EBD025F.8D5E16D9@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Date:	Sat, 10 May 2003 14:45:03 +0100
From:	Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.23 i586)
X-Accept-Language:	de,fr
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Andrew Cottrell <acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au>
CC:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	Re: (fwd) Re: SIGILL 386 (illegal opcode)
References:	<200305071759 DOT h47HxQte028947 AT speedy DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se> <200305072355 DOT 16047 DOT pavenis AT latnet DOT lv> <200305072055 DOT h47KtG6q010180 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <200305080936 DOT 52719 DOT pavenis AT latnet DOT lv> <010101c31617$29c4fb60$0100a8c0 AT acp42g>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

Andrew Cottrell wrote:
[snip]
> Now for the $64,000 question:-
> 
> For the next alpha release do you think we should switch to GCC 3.2.3 or
> move to 3.3 snapshots with the assumption that GCC 3.3 is realeased before
> the 2.04 is released?
> 
> I don't have the time to build both sets of packages, but I can build the
> files with GCC 3.3 and upload them to clio and then when GCC 3.3 is released
> then these could become the next alpha after gcc 3.3 is released.

I think we should stick to 3.2.x for a while. Certainly I don't think we
should switch to gcc 3.3 until after the next alpha. I don't think it will
have got much testing until then.

We definitely need to get a gcc 3.2.x out there with the struct return fix.

Bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe [ http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/ ]

- Raw text -