[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: State of gcc 2.95 use in Debian unstable

On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 06:30:00PM +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote:

> The need for gcc-2.95 usually means the source code is broken (in C99
> terms) and should be fixed. Do you have an example of an use case where
> this is unfeasible, and which is important enough to justify continued
> maintenance of gcc 2.95?

It was relatively common to find C++ code that wouldn't build with the
new C++ front end in GCC 3.0.

"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: