(no subject)

Richard A Downing FBCS CITP richard at langside.org.uk
Thu Mar 30 02:00:17 PST 2006

Henry christenson wrote:
> A simple grammer change would reslove the issue. here is how it
> appears in the book.
>  Required Patch (if compiled using GCC-3.4.x)
> This tells readers If you are compileing with any varient of gcc 3.4
> you need this patch.
> all that would need to be done to reslove this from being posted again is.
>  Required Patch (if compiled using anything over GCC-3.4.x)

You are a dirty Top Poster :-)  Please use our netiquet when
contributing on the LFS list.  See FAQ.  Gmail can be so configured.

How about:

  Required Patch (Yes, really, whatever damn version of gcc you have!)

Although it is strictly not true if you have an antediluvian gcc (pre
3.4), but the number of those will be almost nil in LFS circles,
particularly amongst new users, who are the ones that can't work it out
for themselves.

Bending over backwards for the backward isn't a good use of


More information about the blfs-support mailing list