Message-ID: <00d001be1e5c$0fb383c0$13eb43ca@dt2>
From: "Don Tennant II" <dt2 AT hknet DOT com>
To: <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
Cc: <nate AT cartsys DOT com>
Subject: Re: Djgpp 3.0?
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 09:27:04 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.0810.800
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.0810.800
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

>> thanks for the clarification.  i'm running 2.01 (checked the
readme.1st) --
>> time to upgrade!  :-)
>
>Probably not, actually; you should keep using 2.01 for "production"
>purposes.  Feel free to use 2.02, but it's probably best that anything
>you distribute should be built with the 2.01 headers and library.  2.02,
>being beta, may still have unpleasant bugs (though at present it seems
>from reports to be rather stable).

thank you, nate.  any idea when the 2.02 golden master (so to speak) will
appear?