Xref: utzoo comp.windows.x:6984 gnu.gcc.bug:418
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!gatech!ncsuvx!lll-winken!gauss.llnl.gov!casey
From: casey@gauss.llnl.gov (Casey Leedom)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x,gnu.gcc.bug
Subject: Re: xclock -analog broken under Purdue + PurduePlus speed ups
Summary: Not a problem with X speed ups - it's a problem with gcc 1.32
Message-ID: <389@lll-winken.UUCP>
Date: 29 Dec 88 21:01:29 GMT
References: <388@lll-winken.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@lll-winken.UUCP
Reply-To: casey@gauss.llnl.gov.UUCP (Casey Leedom)
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Lines: 18

| From: casey@lll-crg.llnl.gov (Casey Leedom)
| 
|   And, I have to say that the reviews were right.  The Speed ups make X
| wonderfully fast.  I recommend them to anyone willing to be committed to
| compiling X with gcc and not being able to compile with your native
| compiler.  Just be sure that you don't blithely install a new version of
| gcc without checking to make sure that it compiles X without bugs ...
| 
|   But, on to the main point, everything except xclock -analog seems to be
| working.

  Well, cut me a new point of view if I can't follow my own advise.  I
installed the server speed ups at the same time I upgraded from gcc 1.31
to 1.32.  Gcc 1.32 apparently has a bug in it which causes the behavior
in xclock -analog that I mentioned.  I will endeavor to find the bug and
report it to the GNU people.  Sorry for wasting everyone's time ...

Casey