Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 18:07:23 -0400 From: Alexander Kabaev <ak03@gte.com> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: Scott_Long@adaptec.com, jesse_gross@yahoo.com, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: GCC 3.2 Message-ID: <20020815180723.00a5a83d.ak03@gte.com> In-Reply-To: <3D5C21C3.7A848926@mindspring.com> References: <2C7CBDC6EA58D6119E4A00065B3A24CB046493@btcexc01.btc.adaptec.com> <20020815152703.2f0f23e1.ak03@gte.com> <3D5C21C3.7A848926@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Cool. > > We can call it "3.3" in the release. Terry, we will name it the same way we name our current GCC 3.1 snapshots. FreeBSD always shipped tweaked version of GCC with a bunch of local changes merges in. In STABLE, for example, we have gcc version 2.95.4 20020320 [FreeBSD] > Just like RedHat jumped the gun on the compiler release. We are not _releasing_ our own version of GCC and we do not invent our own version numbers for it, so your attempt to compare us with RedHat is unjustified. Again, FreeBSD 5.0 will be in no shape for serious production use and putting GCC 3.2 there just to replace it with newer and possibly binary incompatible 3.3 release shortly afterwards is a complete waste of time. > And we all know how successful that was, right? On the other side, we all know how successfull we were trying to get GCC 2.95.x bugs fixed for us, right? Do you really want to repeat this deeply satisfying experiment again? -- Alexander Kabaev To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020815180723.00a5a83d.ak03>