>>>>> "FD" == Fergal Daly <fergal at esatclear.ie> writes:
FD> I think Redhat might argue that the kernel developers have
FD> been shipping broken code for a long time and that Redhat's
That very much depends on how you define "broken code". Code that
triggers internal compiler errors or whose machine code form produces
results that are wrong is not broken. When that happens, you have a
broken compiler.
FD> gcc is considerably less broken than most other distros'
FD> compilers, especially when it comes to C++ support,
RedHat's compiler is totally broken compared to that shipped with
other distros since it:
1) will not build a working kernel (unless you install the 2.96-69
update). And yes, I know about kgcc.
2) uses a C++ ABI that is incompatible with a) gcc 2.95.* and b) gcc
3.0
--
"Weaseling out of things is what separates us from the
animals ... except the weasel."
-- Emad El-Haraty
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!
