Thomas Wouters writes: > The 'unstable' branch of Debian currently ships with: > gcc version 2.95.2 20000220 (Debian GNU/Linux) > > and it seems to be working fine. I did notice a problem, but it was related I understand this to be the latest "stable" version of GCC, and it appearantly it has been accepted as such for a while now. > above it. I had to laugh, though, when I saw that assuming longs had 64 bits > is considered 'a safe assumption'. I guess most people use 64 bit machines > nowadays ? :-) Hey, my machine is 4294967296 bits! Forget those ancient 64 bit machines! ;-) > I'm not complaining about this, though. Woody (Debian's current unstable > tree) is bleeding edge, and I'm fully prepared to live with it. In fact, I > love it! But people testing out glibc 2.1.90+ should keep this in mind. I'm I'm less concerned about people who know they're deliberatly putting themselves on the bleeding edge than the people that pick up the latest version of some Linux distribution and find they have a buggy compiler because the distribution builders weren't as careful as perhaps they should have been. Putting together a professional grade Linux distro is still a very hard thing. There's no such thing as enough testing here! -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at beopen.com> BeOpen PythonLabs Team Member
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4