On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 06:37:57AM -0700, Collins wrote:
>
> I suppose it all depends on the meaning of "is," to quote Bill
> Clinton.
>
> Separately compiled components that have no interaction can be
> compiled with either compiler, and neither is aware of the other, but
> early adaptors on gentoo did indeed report disastrous results when a
> mix of components compiled with the two different compilers was
> attempted (I don't have the details).
It's got to be a highly specific mix. I'm running kernels built with
2.95.3, 3.0, 3.1, and 3.2; a C library built with 3.2; XFree86 built
with 3.2 and 2.95.3; and applications built with all of them. I've
had ZERO problems.
That said, I'm not going to argue with you about this. Your message
said recompile everything with 3.2, which is perniciously false.
> From everything I read, the major vendors in their rush to get out 3.2
> based products have done their usual sloppy work (not enough testing
> before release), so I'll let the pioneers fend off the arrows (most of
> the arrows have nothing to do with 3.2). At some point the mix will
> change, and there will be a compelling reason to switch to 3.2, and
> there will be a reliable RH, etc.. distro (gentoo is, of course, just
> as stable with 3.2 as with the older compiler), but I don't believe
> that time has come yet.
Well, then, the problem is not the compiler, but the vendors who have
"done their usual sloppy work."
Kurt
--
"Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra and then suddenly it
flips over, pinning you underneath. At night, the ice weasels come."
-- Matt Groening
_______________________________________________
Linux-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
