From owner-freebsd-current Tue May 14 08:05:12 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id IAA16275 for current-outgoing; Tue, 14 May 1996 08:05:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rocky.sri.MT.net (rocky.sri.MT.net [204.182.243.10]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA16268 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 08:05:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.sri.MT.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) id JAA15691; Tue, 14 May 1996 09:04:28 -0600 Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 09:04:28 -0600 From: Nate Williams Message-Id: <199605141504.JAA15691@rocky.sri.MT.net> To: Warner Losh Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: version of makeinfo in -current In-Reply-To: <199605141433.IAA10234@rover.village.org> References: <199605141433.IAA10234@rover.village.org> Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > : > If there wasn't, then there would be no reason for new versions, would > : > there? > : > : The reason for gcc 2.7 was for a rash of new features, but with very few > : bug-fixes. Gcc 2.7 needed at least one more minor upgrade before it > : could be considered stable, but the FSF decided against it for some > : reason. > > Ummmm, errr, They are doing another minor upgrade shortly.... They are going to do another 2.7 release *before* a 2.8 release? Does it fix all of the ugly bugs in 2.7 that currently exist, most notably the stupid x86 optimization bugs?