On Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 09:08:04PM +0000, OS wrote:
> Red Hat were seriously questioned about the inclusion of gcc-2.96. But without
> trying it how can you take these press reports with any kind of credulity. Suck
> it and see, if it don't work it can always be removed (I've seen that before
> with Cooker !).
I didn't want to get involved in this, but... I don't have any problems
with Mandrake using gcc-2.96 in their unstable distribution called Cooker.
No one really should use cooker for anything that comes even close to
production. Ask anyone at Mandrake and they'll probably tell you that.
But what RedHat did was really bad. You clearly should not include a
snapshot of undoubtfully the most important package in a stable release.
And even more so if this is a point release and you're the leader of the
pack. In my opinion that was plain stupid.
On the other hand, Mandrake-people already said on this list, that they are
not going to be so stupid. They will not use a "broken" compiler in a
release. They might use gcc 2.96(.x?), but they will make it work. And if
they say it, I'll believe it.
Plainly, I don't quite understand what all this mocking is about. You can't
stand the heat of the bleading edge? Well, too bad, go to the stable
releases then. See ya when you catchup again.
Yes, I also reported that gcc 2.96 was moved to stable, but frankly, I
hadn't payed much attention to the tag-line.
EOT on this one for me.
Alexander Skwar
--
Homepage: http://www.digitalprojects.com | http://www.dp.ath.cx
Sichere Mail? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] fuer GnuPG Keys
ICQ: 7328191
