On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 11:12:05AM +0200, Richard Atterer wrote: >On Mon, Jun 14, 2004 at 11:00:58PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 14, 2004 at 11:56:32PM +0200, Richard Atterer wrote: >> >> What exactly is the problem there? It would be _really_ nice if we >> could get this fixed before sarge is released... > >I'm currently working on a fix. Big file support is broken in the stdlibc++ >GCC 3.0 through 3.3. GCC 2.95 or 3.4 is fine. > >On one hand, the mingw (GCC for Windows) folks are likely to release a >mingw version of GCC 3.4 soon (RC is already out), OTOH I'm writing a small >wrapper which uses normal fopen() etc calls instead of C++ streams. > >(Originally, my plan was to wait for GCC 3.4 and avoid doing this dirty >workaround, that's why it didn't happen earlier. Unfortunately, it looks >like GCC 3.4 will not be released with sarge, and I don't really want to >stick to GCC 2.95, so I have to implement the workaround after all.) > >So this will be a non-issue RSN. Cool. Let me know as / when you'd like some help testing it. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com Welcome my son, welcome to the machine.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature