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 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 CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, DJ Delorie 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> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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/ ]