Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 09:13:04 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Laurynas Biveinis <lauras AT softhome DOT net>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: libstdc++ [io]fstream cannot open file in binary mode (g++ and egcs) (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <388F1316.9E9635E@softhome.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000127091231.15566B-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: dj-admin AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Wed, 26 Jan 2000, Laurynas Biveinis wrote:

> The GCC team is considering 2.95.3 release, AFAIK. So that patch will (?)
> be there anyway.

It remains to be seen.  AFAIK, the release schedules of GCC and
libstdc++ are not necessarily in sync.

> BTW, what about making releases based on latest branch CVS version
> instead of oficial ones?

I don't think this is a good idea: the main branch is too unstable.  I
think the most we should do is track the branch of the latest official
release (i.e. 2.95.x in this case).  Using the development branch is
not for the faint of heart, and we cannot place the burden of using
unstable compiler on a typical DJGPP user.

Anyway, given the frequency of the official releases, I think the only
thing we need to worry about is that Andris will have enough time to
keep up ;-).