>>>> "SJT" == Stephen J Turnbull
<stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
SJT> I'm not sure it's RH after all. Nix seems to think it's GCC
SJT> 3. See thread at
SJT>
http://list-archive.xemacs.org/xemacs-beta/200205/msg00189.html.
SJT> Now, of course there's a good chance that whatever broke in
SJT> GCC 3 is in Red Hat's "improved" version of gcc 2.9x.
>>>> "BAW" == <bwarsaw(a)python.org>
writes:
BAW> Yup, that's the exact same problem I'm seeing, and just like
BAW> the folks in that thread, I'm also using "RH-enhanced" gcc
BAW> 2.96:
BAW> % gcc -v Reading specs from
BAW> /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-redhat-linux/2.96/specs gcc version
BAW> 2.96 20000731 (Red Hat Linux 7.3 2.96-110)
BAW> I'll try sucking down various gcc 3.x's and see if they make
BAW> any difference.
Building w/ a from-source fresh build of gcc 3.1 makes no
difference.:(
What next?
-Barry