Re: Re: GCC problem, take two

On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 12:26:15PM +0100, T. Ribbrock wrote:

> Hm - that leads me to a question: If the sparc64 (or whatever the
> "default" gcc is called) gcc is broken on both sparc64 and sparc32

It is broken on sparc64. sparc32 should be fine.

> Also, having to use the "sparc32" wrapper on a 32bit box seems off to
> me - it should be the implicit default IMO.

It is. As far as I read, you were talking about a sparc64 machine,
no?

> as the current description does not make it clear that it's a
> *required* package on both sparc32 and sparc64.

It should not be required on sparc32.

-- 
/* Sun, you just can't beat me, you just can't.  Stop trying,
 * give up.  I'm serious, I am going to kick the living shit
 * out of you, game over, lights out.
 */             -- linux-2.4.21-pre1/arch/sparc/lib/checksum.S (2.4.21)