Re: Sparc buildd a cross-compiler?

[Philip Blundell <philb@gnu.org>]

In message <[🔎] 20011222134912.B30037@blimpo.internal.net>, Ben Collins writes:
>Don't discount sparc just because the code is broken. That's a bug in
>itself. Fix the code, get it to compile. SPARC is one of the most tested
>archs we have, so if it is broken there, you have some serious issues
>anyway, and covering it by not building on sparc is not the answer.
>
>I don't do C++, so you'll have to ask some experts.

G++ 2.95 is pretty broken in its own right.  Just because it won't compile
something doesn't necessarily mean that the source is at fault.  I wouldn't 
regard it as unreasonable for C++ programs to require 3.0 these days.

p.