Re: Signal 11

Dan Egli
2000-12-16T01:52:55Z

On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> Yes.
>
> And I realize that somebody inside RedHat really wanted to use a snapshot
> in order to get some C++ code to compile right.
>
> But it at the same time threw C stability out the window, by using a
> not-very-widely-tested snapshot for a major new release.
>
> Are you seriously saying that you think it was a good trade-off? Or are
> you just ashamed of admitting that RH did something stupid?
>
Pardon the poking in here, but I must say I agree here. RH did a VERY dumb
thing.

> I have a report from a Sony VAIO user that couldn't compile the CVS X at
> all on his picturebook (and you need to compile the CVS tree in order to
> get required fixes for the ATI Rage Mobility in that machine). I don't
> know the details, but they were apparently due to RH 7 issues.

It's not in the X tree or anything, but here's a personal example.
Machine: Dual P3 550
HDD: Dual Ultra2Wide Seagate 18GB Hdd
OS: RedHat 7
Compile Target: Linux Kernel 2.2.17
Result with gcc 2.96: Failure (syntax errors in the i386 branch of the
arch tree)
Result with compat-egcs-62: Success on the first try.