From:	ryot AT bigfoot DOT com (George Ryot)
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Installing DJGPP
Message-ID:	<37b42bde.22816438@news.clara.net>
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 990812111454 DOT 9373X-100000 AT is>
X-Newsreader:	Forte Agent 1.5/32.452
X-No-Archive:	yes
MIME-Version:	1.0
Date:	Thu, 12 Aug 1999 21:57:45 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host:	195.8.92.217
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT clara DOT net
X-Trace:	nnrp3.clara.net 934495065 195.8.92.217 (Thu, 12 Aug 1999 22:57:45 BST)
NNTP-Posting-Date:	Thu, 12 Aug 1999 22:57:45 BST
Lines:	27
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> wrote:

> > Does that mean that we will have gcc, gxx and gpp?
> 
> Yes.

That raises more questions, but I'll hang on to those for now. :)

> > A note
> > about this in readme.1st would eliminate any doubt in case of any
> > unexplained problems with the installation.
> 
> readme.1st is not meant to be the FAQ; if we try to put every problem
> there, it surely won't be read by anyone.  Who can afford to read a
> 100K README file just to install a package?

Even at 14k already the readme.1st file does an excellent job of
introducing new users to DJGPP and of course additions should not be
made that would detract from this.  But I was thinking that maybe
"Installation" section 2 could mention duplicate files.

In general though, is it safe to assume that files with the latest
timestamps should be used or could there be cases where the reverse is
true?  Or, as your other post about the use of unzip -o implies, does
it not matter?
-- 
george

- Raw text -