Re: [ANN] ultimate++ 0.1.7 windows/linux C++ development platform - first linux test
From: Benny Hill (benny_hill3_at_your_rose_colored_glassesyahoo.com)
Date: 04/03/04
- Next message: Kenji Chan: "Re: would an datagram/packet get shorter?"
- Previous message: WTH: "Re: IDE for C: KDevelop vs Emacs vs Other"
- In reply to: Mirek Fidler: "Re: [ANN] ultimate++ 0.1.7 windows/linux C++ development platform - first linux test"
- Next in thread: Mirek Fidler: "Re: [ANN] ultimate++ 0.1.7 windows/linux C++ development platform - first linux test"
- Reply: Mirek Fidler: "Re: [ANN] ultimate++ 0.1.7 windows/linux C++ development platform - first linux test"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2004 17:19:59 -0600
On Thu, 01 Apr 2004 22:11:09 +0200, Mirek Fidler wrote:
>> Amazing what you did!
>
> Does it mean that binary works on your Linux? Can you tell me what Linux
> do you run?
Hello Mirek,
I downloaded UPP and the executable works for me.
Mandrake Linux 9.2
Good luck with the project it does look quite impressive.
-- Benny
- Next message: Kenji Chan: "Re: would an datagram/packet get shorter?"
- Previous message: WTH: "Re: IDE for C: KDevelop vs Emacs vs Other"
- In reply to: Mirek Fidler: "Re: [ANN] ultimate++ 0.1.7 windows/linux C++ development platform - first linux test"
- Next in thread: Mirek Fidler: "Re: [ANN] ultimate++ 0.1.7 windows/linux C++ development platform - first linux test"
- Reply: Mirek Fidler: "Re: [ANN] ultimate++ 0.1.7 windows/linux C++ development platform - first linux test"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|