On Fri, 1 Oct 1999, Alan Shoemaker wrote:
> Axalon Bloodstone wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 30 Sep 1999, Eosnet Team wrote:
> >
> > > http://www.netscape.com/download/selectlanguage_1_702_411.html
> > >
> > >
> > > Here is a link to the latest version of netscape. (maybe more stable?)
> > >
> >
> > I wouldn't recommend it, it's just as broken as the 4.61. (everybody
> > remebers the segfault on link insertion right?)
> >
> >
> > --
> > MandrakeSoft http://www.mandrakesoft.com/
> > --Axalon
> --Axalon
>
> EXCUSE ME!! That statement really puts me off! 4.61 is what is in
> Mandrake's updates for 6.0!!?? It was recommended in this forum as an
> acceptable fix for the problems associated with 4.5. Now you say this
> new (4.7) version is just as bad as the fix we had for the Mandrake 6.0
> distribution (which I still am using). Well, what's that mean,
> EXACTLY!!?? If 4.7 is just as bad as 4.61 then upgrading to it
> shouldn't be any more of a problem than continuing to use 4.61, or
> should it??!! Sheeesh!!!!
>
> Alan
Your excused, I do not thing you've been following the netscape saga
closely enough. They link the glibc version against 2.0, we supply 2.0.1
and 2.1.1, both of wich are incompatable with the binarys. The version of
netscape we currently ship is the libc5 with a really fancy loader.
I've installed both the glibc and libc5 versions here, libc5 fails to even
load because it doeesn't use the loader (exactly what one would expect),
the glibc (still linked against old glibc) acts just like the orignal 4.61
that was released, java works when it wants, you have to make sure to
click "ok" and not just hit enter on a passowrd dialog, inserting a link
in composer still causes an instant segfault.
So yes, my expectations of netscape held true, and i stand by my original
analysis of netscape.
--
MandrakeSoft http://www.mandrakesoft.com/
--Axalon
