On Mon, 9 Aug 1999, Christopher C Chimelis wrote: > It still fails...same problem. This *might* be fixed in the upcoming > glibc 2.95.1, but I doubt it. I'll double-check that anyway, but go ahead > and inquire on the glibc list if you can about the status of this. Argh...teaches me to type when sick with a cold....make that the upcoming gcc 2.95.1 :-) C