This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Testsuite ad RedHat 7
- To: mrs at windriver dot com (Mike Stump)
- Subject: Re: Testsuite ad RedHat 7
- From: Joe Buck <jbuck at racerx dot synopsys dot com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 19:26:56 -0700 (PDT)
- Cc: espie at quatramaran dot ens dot fr, geoffk at cygnus dot com, pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, jfm2 at club-internet dot fr
> If the snapshots do not offer binary compatibility, then the people
> that broke that compatibility are the people that do the snapshots.
Well, yes. So what? We issued a statement saying two things: one,
that we didn't put out anything called "2.96", and two, that there
were C++ binary incompatibility issues. These are simply facts.
> If the people that offer then snapshots want compatibility, then they
> have to offer it. It is rather useless to try and place the blame for
> it on someone else.
In the old Unix world, different vendors deliberately introduced
incompatibilities for competitive reasons. Now, in this case, Red Hat had
nothing like that in mind (despite the conspiracy theorists claiming
otherwise), but the idea that it's not legitimate to criticize people for
introducing incompatibilities is not an idea that is good for Linux.
After all, it nearly killed Unix.
The statement we published explains the compatibility problem.
Inference on your part of blame is just that, your inference.