Re: [Sheflug] GCC 2.96..bugfix/errata :-)

["Alex Hudson" <nospam [at] alexhudson.com>]

> > ...Quite a long thread afterwards, and Alan Cox does defend RH,
> > to a point, but he does a lot of stuff for RH anyway (so draw your own
> > conclusions). But he goes on to say that if you are planning on writing
> > code and releasing binaries, use Redhat 6.2. The general consensus seems
> > to be that RH did a silly thing having a dist with an
development/snapshot
> > compiler.
>  Yeah, I read this at the time, and AC was taking some serious flak.
> Still, I hope that RH will learn.

I believe AC, rather than just "[doing] a lot of work for RH", is actually
employed by them :)

To defend RH a little, I think their main problem stems from the fact that
people with RPM can't track Rawhide like people with Mandrake track Cooker
or people with Debian track unstable/testing. I think RH7 came out of the
door so fast because of the new RPM - at least, I think that was a big
factor. Turning RPM into a kind of apt+dpkg is probably not a great idea, if
Connectiva can put apt over RPM anyone can, but I think they badly needed
better network upgrades.

Cheers,

Alex.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheffield Linux User's Group - http://www.sheflug.co.uk
To unsubscribe from this list send mail to
- <sheflug-request [at] vuw.ac.nz> - with the word 
 "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. 

  GNU the choice of a complete generation.