GCC vs GLIBC: why this stance, Drepper ?!?

[H . J . Lu]

On Sun, Jul 01, 2001 at 12:17:34AM +0100, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Jun 2001, H . J . Lu wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Jul 01, 2001 at 12:06:09AM +0100, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > > 
> > > Could someone please provide a complete, tested patch for 2.95.3 to allow
> > 
> > What do you need 2.95.3 for? I don't use it myself.
> 
> Until the issues from these threads are resolved, 2.95.3 plus a small
> patch should be a more conservative solution for reliably building glibc
> than 3.0.  AFAIK both

I am happy with gcc 2.96 from RedHat. I will recommend it over gcc
2.95.x for glibc 2.2. But it is only my opinion.


H.J.