unintended usage of gcc-2.96

[Jakub Jelinek]

On Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 09:15:57PM -0400, William Bader wrote:
> > > Would it help to make the text reported by "gcc --version" say
> > > something like "prerelease" or "development"?
> >
> > Nope.  You see, when a company makes a release of gcc, then the words
> > prerelease don't apply, so they would have to take them out.  Same
> > with development or experimental.
> 
> If they do that, in order to comply with the GPL, don't they have to
> display an obvious notice that they changed the source and then provide
> information about locating the patches?

We provide all used patches with the distribution in gcc src.rpm which you
either get on one of the CDs in the boxed set or you can grab from ftp.
Our gcc -v is changed so that it is clear it is not vanilla FSF snapshot:

Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-redhat-linux/2.96/specs
gcc version 2.96 20000731 (Red Hat Linux 7.0)

	Jakub