gcc doesn't compile using RH7 as base?

Gerard Beekmans gerard at linuxfromscratch.org
Mon Jan 29 15:51:00 PST 2001


> I see what you're saying, but when I use rpm -q to see what versions I've
> got, it's glibc-2.1.92-14 and gcc-2.96-54. Should I still try using
> gcc-2.95.2.1 ? Do you mean, as the compiler, or as the thing to be
> compiled? Clear as mud, I'm sure.

glibc-2.1.92-14 is another name for the beta release of glibc-2.2.0

gcc-2.96-54 is another name for an unreleased alpha release of gcc-3.0

beta glibc...unreleased alpha release....see why RH7 isn't liked much?

btw "unreleased alpha" may be "unreleased beta" but the fact is that gnu.org 
has never intented for gcc-2.96 to be used by public: it was only to be used 
by gcc developers because it's pretty much unusable.

> Thanks for replying so swiftly, are you in the USA? I won't be able to

I'm in Toronto, Canada


-- 
Gerard Beekmans
www.linuxfromscratch.org

-*- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -*-

-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message




More information about the lfs-dev mailing list