From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7471 invoked by alias); 6 Jul 2002 17:28:42 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 7427 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2002 17:28:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kraid.nerim.net) (62.4.16.95) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 6 Jul 2002 17:28:40 -0000 Received: from localhost (aboukir-101-1-16-gbeauche.adsl.nerim.net [62.212.104.244]) by kraid.nerim.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BCDA410B9; Sat, 6 Jul 2002 19:22:33 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 11:10:00 -0000 Subject: Re: C++ binary compatibility between GCC 3.1 and GCC 3.2? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v481) Cc: Andreas Jaeger , Jakub Jelinek , Gabriel Dos Reis , Mark Mitchell , "obrien@freebsd.org" , "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" To: law@redhat.com From: Gwenole Beauchesne In-Reply-To: <200207061650.g66Goub07332@porcupine.slc.redhat.com> Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00279.txt.bz2 Hi, > In message , Andreas Jaeger writes: >> Jakub Jelinek writes: >> I agree with you, Jakub. >> >> Who would be interested in such a switch? FreeBSD and SuSE seem to be >> interested. What about Linux distributors, e.g. Red Hat and other >> OSes? > We're definitely interested. And like SuSE, if we could get the bits in > July they would be useful, if they don't arrive until September, then > they > would not be useful. Likewise to Red Hat and SuSE, we are interested in those changes/switch too. And September would be too late as well. Bye, Gwenole, sorry to aol'izing.