This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++-prs@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
libstdc++/80: Was the announcement of merging libstdc++ v3 into gcc wrong?
- To: libstdc++-gnats at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
- Subject: libstdc++/80: Was the announcement of merging libstdc++ v3 into gcc wrong?
- From: rovf at earthling dot net
- Date: 2 Aug 2000 08:41:33 -0000
- Reply-To: rovf at earthling dot net
- Resent-Cc: libstdc++-prs at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
- Resent-Reply-To: libstdc++-gnats@sourceware.cygnus.com, rovf@earthling.net
>Number: 80
>Category: libstdc++
>Synopsis: Was the announcement of merging libstdc++ v3 into gcc wrong?
>Confidential: no
>Severity: non-critical
>Priority: low
>Responsible: unassigned
>State: open
>Class: doc-bug
>Submitter-Id: net
>Arrival-Date: Wed Aug 02 01:47:00 PDT 2000
>Closed-Date:
>Last-Modified:
>Originator: Ronald Fischer
>Release: gcc 2.95.2
>Organization:
>Environment:
Solaris 2.7
>Description:
http://sources.redhat.com/libstdc++/ contains the following announces:
2000-04-21
Officially merged library sources into GCC.
2000-03-24
Ninth snapshot release, libstdc++-2.90.8.tar.gz
From this I conclude that the current version of gcc should
already include libstdc++-2.90.8, but I checked several ftp
sites, and they all listed only gcc 2.95.2 with the old library
as their latest release (dating back to autumn '99).
>How-To-Repeat:
>Fix:
Use the old gcc and explicitly build the new library.
>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted: