This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [Lsb-wg] opposition to LSB 2.0 rc1

From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
To: Matt Taggart <taggart at carmen dot fc dot hp dot com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan at lxorguk dot ukuu dot org dot uk>, anderson at freestandards dot org, Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org, lsb-wg at freestandards dot org
Date: 30 Jul 2004 20:44:24 +0200
Subject: Re: [Lsb-wg] opposition to LSB 2.0 rc1
Organization: Integrable Solutions
References: <20040729111335.57e712fd.bkoz@redhat.com><Pine.LNX.4.58.0407291552020.21442@trantor.stuart.netsweng.com><1091136754.1487.26.camel@localhost.localdomain><20040730000214.29AE137D8D@carmen.fc.hp.com>

Matt Taggart <taggart@carmen.fc.hp.com> writes:

| The spec is based on 3.3. Do you know of problems where they don't match?
| Most of the runtime implementations are using 3.3.4 in their current 
| shipping releases.

I suggest you have a look at the recent discussions about symbols that
to be added to GCC-3.3.5 (a currently inexistant release) for LSB 2.0
to make sense.

-- Gaby

References:
- opposition to LSB 2.0 rc1
  - From: Benjamin Kosnik
- Re: [Lsb-wg] opposition to LSB 2.0 rc1
  - From: anderson
- Re: [Lsb-wg] opposition to LSB 2.0 rc1
  - From: Alan Cox
- Re: [Lsb-wg] opposition to LSB 2.0 rc1
  - From: Matt Taggart

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]