[rescue] [OT?] Linux on a SS2
Jonathan C. Patschke
jp at celestrion.net
Sat Feb 14 20:17:00 CST 2004
On Sat, 14 Feb 2004, Carl R. Friend wrote:
> > with a sour taste for Redhat ever since. "GCC 2.96" didn't help with
> > that at all.
> Well, I'm not averse to bootstrapping gcc on architectures that
> it's supported on (Hell, I did it on ULTRIX 4.3) so taht doesn't
> scare me in the least.
I was referring to the CVS snapshot of GCC that RedHat included with v7
that they marked "GCC 2.96". It was horribly-broken, not release-quality,
and not ABI-compatible with anything else. It resulted in a firestorm
of hate mail and bugreports to the FSF, who responded with this:
Yeah, building GCC is not terribly painful (in general), but when the OS
vendor ships a broken compiler with no upgrade path in sight, eh, life's
Jonathan Patschke ) "Being on the Internet is not the same as being
Elgin, TX ( famous. That's like calling Cheetos 'dinner'."
USA ) --Metal Steve
More information about the rescue