| 1 |
begin quote |
| 2 |
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 06:50:33 -0700 |
| 3 |
Seemant Kulleen <seemant@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> Hi All, |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> We'd like to receive comments (the negative ones, especially) for |
| 8 |
> moving gcc-3.2.3-r1, glibc-2.3.2-r1 and binutils-2.14.90.0.2 from |
| 9 |
> ~arch to arch (at least for x86 platform). |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Thats all well and good with me, I'm currently (and successfully) |
| 13 |
running a stable system based on the following: |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Portage 2.0.48-r1 (default-x86-1.4, gcc-3.2.3, glibc-2.3.2-r1 |
| 17 |
binutils-2.13.90.0.18 ) |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
And no complaints there in the interaction on a small system. And all |
| 20 |
have performed nicely on ~x86 as well. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
//Spider |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
begin .signature |
| 27 |
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature! |
| 28 |
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information. |
| 29 |
end |
Archives