diff DOCS/users_against_developers.html @ 7094:208e6b23b038

Settle for GCC, not gcc. 10l for telling Andras otherwise.

--- a/DOCS/users_against_developers.html	Tue Aug 27 01:31:57 2002 +0000
+++ b/DOCS/users_against_developers.html	Tue Aug 27 08:12:58 2002 +0000
@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
 
 <P><B>The background:</B> The GCC <B>2.95</B> series is an official GNU release
   and version 2.95.3 of GCC is the most bug-free in that series.
-  We have never noticed compilation problems that we could trace to gcc-2.95.3. 
+  We have never noticed compilation problems that we could trace to GCC 2.95.3. 
   Starting with Red Hat Linux 7.0, <B>Red Hat</B> included a heavily
   patched CVS version of GCC in their distribution and named it <B>2.96</B>. Red
   Hat included this version in the distribution because GCC 3.0 was not finished
@@ -70,7 +70,7 @@
   3.0.4 packages offered for version 7.2 and later. You can also get
   <A HREF="ftp://people.redhat.com/jakub/gcc3/3.1-1/">gcc-3.1 packages</A>
   (unofficial, but working fine) and you can
-  install them along the gcc-2.96 you already have. MPlayer will detect it and
+  install them along the GCC 2.96 you already have. MPlayer will detect it and
   use 3.1 instead of 2.96. If you do not want to or cannot use the binary
   packages, here is how you can compile GCC 3.1 from source:</P>
 
@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@
     but needs a build directory outside the source directory.  Thus you need to
     create this directory via<BR>
     <CODE>mkdir gcc-build</CODE></LI>
-  <LI>Then you can proceed to configure gcc in the build directory, but you need
+  <LI>Then you can proceed to configure GCC in the build directory, but you need
     the configure from the source directory:<BR>
     <CODE>cd gcc-build<BR>
     ../gcc-3.1/configure</CODE></LI>