From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25174 invoked by alias); 8 Sep 2003 16:59:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rhug-rhats-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: rhug-rhats-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 25081 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2003 16:59:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 8 Sep 2003 16:59:12 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (nat-pool-rdu-dmz.redhat.com [172.16.52.200]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h88GxAl24115 for ; Mon, 8 Sep 2003 12:59:11 -0400 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h88Gx2L30618; Mon, 8 Sep 2003 12:59:07 -0400 Received: from dhcp-172-16-25-141.sfbay.redhat.com (dhcp-172-16-25-141.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.25.141]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h88Gx1w13810; Mon, 8 Sep 2003 09:59:01 -0700 Subject: Re: rhug status From: Anthony Green To: Bart Locanthi Cc: rhug-rhats@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: <3F5CB32B.3060203@sabl.com> References: <3F5B766B.7020400@sabl.com> <1063036793.3495.9.camel@escape> <3F5CB32B.3060203@sabl.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Red Hat, Inc. Message-Id: <1063040341.3495.24.camel@escape> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 16:59:00 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-09/txt/msg00002.txt.bz2 On Mon, 2003-09-08 at 09:49, Bart Locanthi wrote: > what's special about the maintainer tools? is it still special? i did > try them, but i would prefer not to have older stuff lying around. I believe they are still special. I don't recall what the differences are - but some of the changes are simple (don't add -DPIC to gcj command line, for instance). > i have yet to try building outside of the source tree. are there any > other ./configure switches you would suggest setting? --disable-static > the errors from UTF as illegal chars seem pretty hard. this may be a new > development with gcc-3.3.1. I don't think you mentioned this error in your mail. Could you please describe it? rhug should build with 3.3.1. I hope you don't mind that I'm keeping the list on copy. The archives are often a useful resource for people looking for help. Thanks, AG -- Anthony Green Red Hat, Inc.