Illegal instruction (core dumped) on i586

[Steven W Orr]

I'm inclined to agree on this one. As an example, fetchmail is delivered
as a .tar.gz file as well as a src.rpm. Lots of software is now coming
that way. When I install *anything* I always look for an rpm to install
from. *If* the tar.gz file is properly set up, i.e., if configure really
works 100% correctly, then the spec file for the rpm, by definition,
becomes trivial. I'm not going to go over the pros and cons of rpm vs. tgz
but I think it's a safe bet that anyone who doesn't use rpm is running on
a system that's just not rpm based. If you have it you use it without
question.

Is there anything else I can say to help stimulate the production of gcc
in both forms?

-- 
----------Time flies like the wind. Fruit flies like a banana.----------------
--------Stranger things have happened but none stranger than this.-------------
Steven W. Orr      steveo@world.std.com     <site of former bang addr:-)>
---------------"Listen to me! We are all individuals."-------------------------

On Wed, 4 Aug 1999, Igor Markov wrote:

=>
=>  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
=>