Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Seth Alan Woolley <seth AT positivism.org>]

You didn't read my that line in context.  For the x86 series, I said that.  

For the series below it (x86-64) I suggested removing the x86-32 compile 
since it was the same as i386.  I didn't suggest removing the pure 
x86-64s and indeed volunteered to help maintain the caches for "x86*" 
which meant x86 and x86_64. :)

Hope that clears things up as I wasn't perfectly clear. :)

Seth

On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 12:32:14PM -0400, Sergey A. Lipnevich wrote:
> David recently helped me recover after gcc 4 installation problem on 
> pure 64-bit
> x68_64 platform. If I only had an option to download 32-bit gcc, it wouldn't
> work without the rest of the 32-bit chain, glibc etc.
> 
> Quoting Seth Alan Woolley <seth AT positivism.org>:
> 
> >
> >Why not stick with just i386?
> >

-- 
Seth Alan Woolley [seth at positivism.org], SPAM/UCE is unauthorized
Key id 00BA3AF3 = 8BE0 A72E A47E A92A 0737  F2FF 7A3F 6D3C 00BA 3AF3
Quality Assurance Team Leader; Security Team Member, Leader Emeritus
Linux so advanced, it may as well be magic http://www.sourcemage.org
Elected Coordinating Committee Member, Secretary, and Finances Chair
Pacific Green Party of Oregon - Peace - http://www.pacificgreens.org

Attachment: pgpBOSJ0sm2NN.pgp
Description: PGP signature