RE: Illegal instruction (core dumped) on i586

["Beardsley, Jason" <jbeardsley@origin.ea.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