Hello,

> We'll probably have a "normal" gcc on larger machines and a trimmed down
> one on smaller machines. There's no reason why, after moving to NetBSD 2.0
> and gcc 3.3, people might not want to choose to continue to use gcc
> 2.95.3.

You mean other than the fact that it is defective (it chokes on certain
bits of code where it probably shouldn't have, gcc for other
architectures most obviously doesn't crash on that code) ?? 
 
Blaz Antonic
-- 
Hi! I'm a signature virus!
Copy me into your signature to help me spread!