Xref: utzoo comp.unix.i386:6329 comp.unix.xenix:12256 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!bfmny0!tneff From: tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM (Tom Neff) Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386,comp.unix.xenix Subject: Re: Xenix vs. UNIX Message-ID: <15618@bfmny0.BFM.COM> Date: 29 Jun 90 07:52:25 GMT References: <4716@thebes.Thalatta.COM> <1990Jun27.232700.3046@virtech.uucp> <223@iphase.UUCP> Reply-To: tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM (Tom Neff) Followup-To: comp.unix.i386 Lines: 12 In article <223@iphase.UUCP> floydf@iphase.UUCP (Floyd Ferguson ENG) writes: ... >While I've successfully compiled gcc and xemacs with [SCO] rcc, gdb would >not go... Uh, if you've compiled gcc, why do you still need rcc to make gdb? Surely gcc is the tool for that job. -- A doubled signature is the devil's work. ** Tom Neff -- A doubled signature is the devil's work. ** Tom Neff