RE: Illegal instruction (core dumped) on i586

["Putney, Jeff" <jputney at networkmanagementinc dot com>]

So some yahoo really thinks gcc should be distributed as source and RedHat
RPMs?  Why redhat?  Why not distribute binaries as solaris packages, or
HP/UX packages, or AIX packages, or DG/UX packages and let's have them do
packages for Slackware and Debian, and all the other linux distrobutions
while we're asking.  Then, while we are on a roll, let's have them do a
package for each of those OS's for each distrobution for each architecture
they run on.  
Linux will run on the palm pilot, don't forget to make a distrobution for
that.
Oh, wait, we need different packages depending on library versions, and type
of assembler and linker.
So, why single out RedHat on an x86?  Is there really a that much greater
density of stupidity on that particular platform.  If so, what does a group
of compiler hackers have to gain from such a group by catering to them?  A
bunch of bug reports because the compiler wouldn't fix their syntax errors
for them and moronic code examples to point to and laugh at is about the
only payback they would get.

--jeff (not the Law, but a jeff of a different flavor)