On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, at 4:42pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > What their stated policy is and what they actually do are two different > things :)
Very true. However, I feel it worth noting that Red Hat doesn't even have a "stated" policy on version numbers; I am simply observing what they have done since they started numbering their releases. > I seem to remember a 7.0->7.1 bump with an incompatible compiler problem. > I'd classify that as an incompatible binary ;) 7.0 came with that infamous, incredibly buggy "GCC 2.96" that was based on a development snapshot of GCC, and not a real release. That was a problem. However, Red Hat, for better or worse, maintained that same compiler tree all the way through Red Hat 7.3. 7.1 marked the jump to the 2.4 kernel. It still ran the same binaries, other than system utilities specific to 2.4. Could that be what you are thinking of? -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person or organization. | | All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
