Finalizing the sanity checks

Jeremy Huntwork jhuntwork at
Tue May 2 10:43:58 PDT 2006

Archaic wrote:
> On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 08:01:28PM -0400, Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
>> OK, here's a second go at it:
> Looks good. I see one thing, though:
> "The most likely reason is that something went wrong with the specs file
> amendment above."
> s/above// because it isn't relevant on the gcc page.

Thanks. I'll fix that shortly.


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list