> On Mon, 27 Nov 2000, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> > 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.
>
> No, but you sure like to read comments about something somewhere
> which are incorrect, and then spread them without researching the
> truth first. There are tonnes of bullshit rumors and FUD going
> around about Red Hat Linux 7.0, and I am sick of reading these
> false statements.
So I typed kcc instead of kgcc (I believe I noted it was from memory)
and that's FUD? Or is it that the default compiler doesn't compile the
kernel, and it's the kernel broken instead of the compiler? Therefore
the problem of needing to have a 2nd compiler because the default
doesn't compile the kernel correctly goes away? If you feel that arguing
about the details makes people forget there's a problem, go to it.
>
> I can back up my statements with official proof, can you?
You vote Democrat in Florida, right?
1. The version of cdrecord with comes with RH7.0 doesn't record CDs.
2. Building cdrecord from source results in a version which does record
CDs.
3. Other people have reported this as well.
I don't know what you consider official proof. Use what works for you
and quit trying to keep people from getting the information they need to
make cdrecord work.
--
-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]
