From rpm-list-admin@freshrpms.net  Mon Aug 19 11:01:47 2002
Return-Path: <rpm-zzzlist-admin@freshrpms.net>
Delivered-To: yyyy@localhost.netnoteinc.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4E5944186
	for <jm@localhost>; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 05:53:58 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from phobos [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Mon, 19 Aug 2002 10:53:58 +0100 (IST)
Received: from egwn.net (ns2.egwn.net [193.172.5.4]) by
    dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7J82T613505 for
    <jm-rpm@jmason.org>; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 09:02:29 +0100
Received: from auth02.nl.egwn.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by egwn.net
    (8.11.6/8.11.6/EGWN) with ESMTP id g7J804J25520; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 10:00:05
    +0200
Received: from mail.aspect.net
    (postfix@adsl-65-69-210-161.dsl.hstntx.swbell.net [65.69.210.161]) by
    egwn.net (8.11.6/8.11.6/EGWN) with ESMTP id g7J7wwJ24023 for
    <rpm-list@freshrpms.net>; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 09:58:58 +0200
Received: from skadi.local. (pcp185108pcs.swedsb01.nj.comcast.net
    [68.46.52.124]) by mail.aspect.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20A176D23C for
    <rpm-list@freshrpms.net>; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 02:49:52 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Limbo beta 2 ?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v543)
From: Julian Missig <julian@jabber.org>
To: rpm-zzzlist@freshrpms.net
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <20020813144303.7b192f78.matthias@egwn.net>
Message-Id: <82544E89-B349-11D6-B9B3-000393D60714@jabber.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.543)
X-Mailscanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
Sender: rpm-zzzlist-admin@freshrpms.net
Errors-To: rpm-zzzlist-admin@freshrpms.net
X-Beenthere: rpm-zzzlist@freshrpms.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rpm-zzzlist@freshrpms.net
List-Help: <mailto:rpm-zzzlist-request@freshrpms.net?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:rpm-zzzlist@freshrpms.net>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freshrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/rpm-zzzlist>,
    <mailto:rpm-list-request@freshrpms.net?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Freshrpms RPM discussion list <rpm-zzzlist.freshrpms.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freshrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/rpm-zzzlist>,
    <mailto:rpm-list-request@freshrpms.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freshrpms.net/pipermail/rpm-zzzlist/>
X-Original-Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 03:58:55 -0400
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 03:58:55 -0400

I realize this is an old thread, but I just had to comment:

On Tuesday, Aug 13, 2002, at 08:43 US/Eastern, Matthias Saou wrote:

> Once upon a time, Dave wrote :
>
>> Eeeek... I hope they aren't intending to release a new RH with a new 
>> gcc
>> which hasn't yet been released (again). Bad enough the first time, and
>> I'm sure it gave RedHat a lot of embarrassment.
>
> Not really, it should have given more embarrassment to sloppy C++
> programmers although they often were the ones bashing on gcc 2.96...

A lot of C++ programmers, myself included, were /not/ complaining about 
gcc's stricter adherence to the specification (which, by the way, a lot 
of kernel programmers complain about with gcc 3.x -- at least, the 
patch authors I've talked to hate gcc 3) -- gcc "2.96" had a lot of 
bugs. A lot. It crashed on me many times while working on my projects. 
Later "versions" of "2.96" fixed this, but it was well after 3.0 was 
released that it finally seemed reasonably stable -- and at that point, 
I just wanted to use 3.0, so I did.

Julian


_______________________________________________
RPM-List mailing list <RPM-List@freshrpms.net>
http://lists.freshrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list