"Mike A. Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Bill Davidsen wrote:
>
> >> I cannot speak for the RH binaries, but please read:
> >>
> >>
>http://www.fokus.gmd.de/research/cc/glone/employees/joerg.schilling/private/problems.html
> >>
> >> and compile the latest version by yourself. If you still have problems,
> >> make a bug report. I need information that helps to find to the problem.
> >
> > RH also grabbed a copy of a development compiler which has all manner
> >of bugs. The GCC folks were supposedly not pleased.
>
> No, RH took a developmental snapshot of gcc, and fixed many bugs,
> did rigorous testing of it, and shipped a pretty solid compiler.
> All software has bugs however, so gcc in Red Hat Linux 7.0 may in
> fact have some. It is not full of "all manner of bugs" however
> as you claim. It is pretty rock solid. The gcc folk were not
> pleased because they didn't want to get bug reports for a release
> of gcc that they did not officially release.
The note from the gcc project said the version RH took had serious
bugs, and was not production quality. I think they have a pretty good
idea what the state of a development release might be.
> This doesn't mean it is buggy at all.
Isn't this the compiler which won't build a working kernel? I have a
note that to build a kernel with RH7 you need to download "kcc" or some
such from the RH site. That's an honest question, not a statement.
> > The bug seems entirely theirs, maybe they "enhanced" the software...
>
> Please take your OS distribution wars somewhere else.
Building cdrecord from source works, the distribution binary doesn't.
I don't consider answering a question and pointing out nonfunctional release
code "OS wars," Linux distributions do not have Papal Infalability.
--
-bill davidsen ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
last possible moment - but no longer" -me
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
