On Samedi 02 Juin 2001 11:39, Richard Zidlicky wrote: > On Fri, Jun 01, 2001 at 05:35:37PM +0200, Thierry Godefroy wrote: > > On Vendredi 01 Juin 2001 15:35, Richard Zidlicky wrote: > > > > RedHat 7.0 got a broken compiler (they use a beta version of > > > > gcc !!!), downgrade to gcc 2.95.2... > > > > > > ... as does everyone else nowadays, including Mandrake and Debian. > > > > Mandrake does NOT (at least not in 7.x): they use a slightly patched > > (by themselves) v2.95.2 and named it as 2.95.3 in Mandrake 7.2 (although > > the actual 2.95.3 was released a few months after Mandrake 7.2). > > Although gcc 2.95.2 got many bugs, it is considered a "stable" > > release by GNU (http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/releases.html)... > > that does not mean 2.95.xx are any better than RH 2.96. Perhaps, but at least the bugs in 2.95.x are known (well, most of them) which was not the case of RedHat's v2.96 (for which a LOT of users complained they were not able to compile their software anymore)... > Quite to the contrary, RedHat 2.96 probably does what it is supposed > to do more often than any patch of 2.95.xx ever will. Just as Mandrake did (but in a safer way IMHO)... Did you ever get a Mandrake SRPMS (of any of their large package source): I am quite impressed with the number of patches they apply to the various software, the more impressive collection of patches applying to the Linux kernel... > Debian is already at 2.95.4 ;) The problem with all these version numbers (with any distro) is that you can't figure out what is the actual state of a software: e.g. is Debian's v2.95.4 better that Mandrake 2.95.3 or even, official gcc 2.95.3 ? You can't tell until you try... > Anyway, if you want a stable compiler get 2.91.66. I know and RedHat & Mandrake know as well: in Mandrake, you get "kgcc" (stands for "kernel gcc", that is, a version you are supposed to use to compile kernels) which is in fact v2.91.66 (the last egcs release 1.1.2 renumbered when gcc/egcs teams merged)... But you also know very well that 2.91.66 is not suitable for compilation of C++ sofwtare against recent C++ libraries... :-( I bless Dave & Keith Walker for giving us (QLers) a reliable and quite stable C compiler (even if it does not compile C++): things with gcc are much more trickier than with C68 !!! QDOS/SMS forever ! Thierry.
