[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> > > hi,
> > > first of all I don't know the overall quality of 7.0 since I'm just come
> > > back from my vacation, but I read many mails and news about in which
> > > people are criticize red hat why they include gcc 2.96 in 7.0.
> >
> > gcc 2.96 is a development
> >
> > libc5 should indeed be included, but not as the base libc, but for
> > applications users already have and which work well. Not everyone
> > wants to go through the process of recompiling and retesting their
> > applications just to move from RHL 5.x to 7.x. IN some cases, it's
> > not a
>
> This is not necessarily a gcc problem. You have to analyze the nature
> of the problems before saying it is. In 5.0 RH took a lot of flak for
> moving to glibc but when you look at the problems most of them were
> not related to it. It looked more like if the move to glibc had
> stretched
On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 01:58:21AM +0800, John Summerfield wrote:
>
> What I find unsettling it the number of packages reshipped already;
> the fact so many problem packages have been found already suggests
> to me there are lots more to be found. Not just obscure packages
> that hardly anyone use
Hi, everybody,
I have finally installed the 7.0 and I have found it has al ot of bugs. Too many.
Anaconda dies when I try to install files from both the CDs, I have updated the
floppy iso from the update ftp directory, but I have I have not installed it again
to test.
I hope there is no need to r
>
> > hi,
> > first of all I don't know the overall quality of 7.0 since I'm just come
> > back from my vacation, but I read many mails and news about in which
> > people are criticize red hat why they include gcc 2.96 in 7.0.
>
> gcc 2.96 is a development version. Its authors say it's not read
> hi,
> first of all I don't know the overall quality of 7.0 since I'm just come
> back from my vacation, but I read many mails and news about in which
> people are criticize red hat why they include gcc 2.96 in 7.0.
gcc 2.96 is a development version. Its authors say it's not ready for release.
hi,
first of all I don't know the overall quality of 7.0 since I'm just come
back from my vacation, but I read many mails and news about in which
people are criticize red hat why they include gcc 2.96 in 7.0.
it seems to me in the last few years that there are just a few people
who are using c++
