[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure
From: |
Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso |
Subject: |
Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure |
Date: |
Thu, 8 May 2008 19:57:22 -0500 |
On 08/05/2008, David Bateman <address@hidden> wrote:
> If no one runs on a 64-bit platform none of the bugs of 64-bit systems
> will be found. That being said I have the misfortune of currently
> running on a 64bit system and yes there are lots of bugs, and I only
> just got a version of java that worked, etc etc etc.
Right, right, I don't mind helping smoothing out bugs whenever I can.
I am just wondering what the benefit will be once this goal is
somewhat achieved. We'll be able to address over four gigs of memory.
What else?
- Jordi G. H.
- Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, (continued)
- Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, 2008/05/08
- Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, David Bateman, 2008/05/08
- Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, Francesco Potorti`, 2008/05/08
- Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, John W. Eaton, 2008/05/08
- Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, Sergei Steshenko, 2008/05/09
- Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, John W. Eaton, 2008/05/09
- Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, Sergei Steshenko, 2008/05/09
- Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, 2008/05/08
- Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, Przemek Klosowski, 2008/05/09
- Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure, Francesco Potorti`, 2008/05/12
- Re: Octave 3.0.1 Scientific Linux 5.1 (RHAT) build failure,
Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <=