[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15]
From: |
Josip Rodin |
Subject: |
Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15] |
Date: |
Tue, 2 Jul 2002 12:58:23 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4i |
On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 12:53:17PM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> >> AAARG! How is anyone (being a humble configure script) supposed to
> >> pick `3.1.1<SPACE>20020606' to be the version string from that?
> >
> > Why do you need the date, anyway? Just "3.1.1" should be enough
>
> Yes, that's what I mean. We just need:
>
> gcc --version
> 3.1.1
Well, if gcc upstream switched to printing both "gcc " and the version
afterwards, you can just use $2.
--
2. That which causes joy or happiness.
- lily 1.4.15, Peter Chubb, 2002/07/01
- Re: lily 1.4.15, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2002/07/02
- Re: lily 1.4.15, Peter Chubb, 2002/07/02
- Re: lily 1.4.15, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2002/07/02
- Message not available
- Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2002/07/02
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Josip Rodin, 2002/07/02
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2002/07/02
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15],
Josip Rodin <=
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2002/07/02
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Wichert Akkerman, 2002/07/02
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2002/07/02
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2002/07/02
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Wichert Akkerman, 2002/07/02
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2002/07/02
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Jochen Voss, 2002/07/02
Re: lily 1.4.15, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2002/07/02