Re: Why does everyone hate gcc 2.95?

[Alexander Viro]

On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Larry McVoy wrote:

> hand picked tests.  No faster.  Just compiles slower.  Add to that 
> some distributions BRAINDEAD default of havving colorgcc be the default
> compiler (can you say fork perl to fork gcc?  Can you say STUPID?), and

ITYM "cute". As in "cute dancing paperclip". As colourized ls. Or rm
aliased to rm -i for root. Or 31337 cAp1tAl1z3d directory names in root.
Or manpages in HTML (yes, today I had to touch Slowlaris too, why are
you asking?) Or info crap verbose as "War and Peace" instead of manpages.
Or --ignore-fail-on-non-empty as rmdir option. Or "let's replace config
files with directories full of one-liners since packagers can't be arsed
to learn sed(1)" religion. Sigh...

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/