glibc 2.0.112
Andreas Jaeger
aj@arthur.rhein-neckar.de
Thu Apr 1 00:00:00 GMT 1999
Thanks Richard, Alex, and Dan for the corrections.
I'd really appreciate if some native speakers could proof read the
whole FAQ (and also the rest of the documentation;-).
Ulrich, please add the appended patch to the FAQ.
Thanks,
Andreas
============================================================
Index: FAQ.in
--- FAQ.in 1999/01/29 07:55:33 1.59
+++ FAQ.in 1999/01/31 23:04:06
@@ -303,13 +303,16 @@
test in the sources.
There are some failures which are not directly related to the GNU libc:
-- Some compiler produce buggy code. The egcs 1.1 release should be ok. gcc
- 2.8.1 might cause some failures, gcc 2.7.2.x is so buggy, that explicit
+- Some compilers produce buggy code. No compiler gets single precision
+ complex numbers correct on Alpha. Otherwise, the egcs 1.1 release should be ok;
+ gcc 2.8.1 might cause some failures; gcc 2.7.2.x is so buggy that explicit
checks have been used so that you can't build with it.
- The kernel might have bugs. For example on Linux/Alpha 2.0.34 the
floating point handling has quite a number of bugs and therefore most of
- the test cases in the math subdirectory will fail. Linux 2.2 has
- fixes for the floating point support on Alpha.
+ the test cases in the math subdirectory will fail. Linux 2.2 has fixes
+ for the floating point support on Alpha. The Linux/Sparc kernel has also
+ some bugs in the fpu emulation code (as of Linux 2.2.0).
+
?? What is symbol versioning good for? Do I need it?
--
Andreas Jaeger aj@arthur.rhein-neckar.de jaeger@informatik.uni-kl.de
for pgp-key finger ajaeger@aixd1.rhrk.uni-kl.de
More information about the Libc-alpha
mailing list