home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!rutgers!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!news.media.mit.edu!news
- From: lacsap@plethora.media.mit.edu (Pascal Chesnais)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.programmer
- Subject: Re: Problems using gcc 2.3.3
- Message-ID: <1993Jan5.201106.556@news.media.mit.edu>
- Date: 5 Jan 93 20:11:06 GMT
- References: <1993Jan3.170501.242@glocke.hotb.sub.org>
- Sender: news@news.media.mit.edu (USENET News System)
- Reply-To: csn@plethora.media.mit.edu
- Organization: MIT Media Laboratory
- Lines: 15
-
- In article <1993Jan3.170501.242@glocke.hotb.sub.org>
- frank@glocke.hotb.sub.org (Frank Thomas) writes:
- > YES,
- > and the question raises again
- > WHY the hell can we not force NeXT to release it's changes to gcc.
- > They must release the source if they distribute the binaries.
-
- uh, dude chill, NeXT has released the complete sources
- to their modifications to gcc for 3.0... It was a timely
- release too.
-
- They are even available on plethora.media.mit.edu via anon
- f t p.
-
- pasc
-