This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: Illegal instruction (core dumped) on i586
- To: "'Igor Markov'" <imarkov at cs dot ucla dot edu>
- Subject: RE: Illegal instruction (core dumped) on i586
- From: "Beardsley, Jason" <jbeardsley at origin dot ea dot com>
- Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 17:32:57 -0500
- Cc: gcc at egcs dot cygnus dot com
IMHO, implying that the GCC group should take any kind of
responsibility for RPMs uploaded to RedHat's contrib directory
is utterly ridiculous. I can't imagine you seriously mean that.
If the packages don't work, then complain to the people who
built them.
If you can't wait for RedHat to issue an official upgrade
to GCC 2.95, then may I suggest building it from source?
Jason Beardsley
-----Original Message-----
From: Igor Markov [mailto:imarkov@cs.ucla.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 1999 5:26 PM
To: John Wehle
Cc: gcc@egcs.cygnus.com
Subject: Re: Illegal instruction (core dumped) on i586
John,
thanks... what you are saying makes sense, but my
main suggestion was that egcs maintainers consider
ensuring the availability of good RPMs. This may
include contacting someone who can pack RPMs, or
learning the RPM tricks or... talking to RedHat,
whatever. Please do not consider this as "making
binaries for every trashy system", but rather
"ensuring the utility to major customers".
I don't suppose many windows applications depend
on gcc and libs, neither on Solaris or HP-UX.
gcc is the default compiler on Linux. Things
are very difft here.
Igor
--
Igor Markov office: (310) 206-0179
http://vlsicad.cs.ucla.edu/~imarkov