

RedHat 7.2 Beta: Roswell 321
LinuxNews.pl writes: "Few days ago RedHat uploaded new Beta release of their distro -
Roswell. If you want to find out more about it just go to the LinuxNews.pl"
And I won't even make a snide comment about how I haven't run Red Hat in 2 years!
Snidey lies... (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah apart from on the Slashdot SQL server [slashdot.org]...
ext3 is there, but where is Reiser? (Score:1)
By the way, how many Code Red hits have you all been seeing? I'm up to 309.
Re:ext3 is there, but where is Reiser? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:ext3 is there, but where is Reiser? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:ext3 is there, but where is Reiser? (Score:2)
Re:ext3 is there, but where is Reiser? (Score:2)
May I assume that many of you are talking about running a journaling filesystem on your workstation? If so, why? It only slows you down. Unless you're talking about a server with 100G+ of disk space you're not going to speed up the boot process that much and I have been running without one for years without loosing any data (actually I do recall loosing files with 2.0 ext2 but I never have lost data with 2.2 ext2 and power has kicked off a few times).
Holy smokes! (Score:4, Insightful)
Personally, I congratulate Rob for having the balls to at least be blunt about it instead of the thinly veiled digs routinely employed by the vast majority of you.
Now, whip out the -1, Troll or Offtopic marking for this as fast as possible and sit back satisfied that another dissenting opinion has been eliminated. It's your duty, isn't it?
Re:Holy smokes! (Score:1)
2- The moderation system in ./ obviously favors the opinion of the majority of its readers ... but better this than having a few selected ones to decide what is good ant what is evil. ./, in favor of non-free e MSish ideas : maybe the Linux/Free Software/Open Source thing is looking less cool for some. Or maybe BG has his employees routinely
post on ./ and then acquiring moderation points and moderating up each others (and maybe big Linux players are doing exactly the same for years). Conspiration theories are always in fashion.
OTOH, I have noticed a sensible shift of the 'average opinion' lately on
3- Saying 'go on and moderate me down' is one of the most successful karma-woring tricks on ./ ...
as you probably know. This worked, too.
No DRI Support (Score:1)
Journaling File System (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Journaling File System (Score:2)
Re:Journaling File System (Score:2, Informative)
Well, if the current discussions taking place in linux-kernel are anything to go by, it provides a journalling FS that doesn't corrupt your data, which can't be said of Rieser at the moment.
The ability to get a journaling FS trivially is actually a very useful one. One incentive to use journalling is to avoid long recovery times for big partitions. If you have big partitions, say 100GB, which is easier - finding a spare 100GB while you do a mkfs for resierfs, or simply poking ext2 a bit and magically aquiring ext3 in place?
Moreover, ext3 provides some more journalling choices than Rieser.
RedHat do provide Rieser as an option, and have since 7 as an install-time FS. But there's no way to convert an extisting ext2 partition to RieserFS.
Re:Journaling File System (Score:2)
Re:Journaling File System (Score:2)
Actually, the last benchmarks I saw showed ext3 coming out pretty much on top overall, closely followed by XFS. Each of the four options has their strong points (ReiserFS is particularly fast at deleting files, for example). However, on balance, it's looking like ext3 could well prove to be up there with the best of them. I'm curious to know what features you think the others provide that ext3 doesn't.
Re:Journaling File System (Score:1)
Re:Journaling File System (Score:2)
I use reiserfs (a JFS) on all but one partition, and if my system crashes (I run a lot of unstable stuff), the reiserfs partitions take about 2 seconds each to check, whereas ext2 takes ages...
Having built-in journaling filesystems is a very good thing. And just so you know, Mandrake has had support for more than a year, so redhat is really just catching up.
Is the complete HP-style LVM integrated? (Score:2)
I know that SUSE is using the new LVM subsystem. It's amazing in that it's just like HP-UX - I just keep wondering where VxFS is.
Really, Red Hat's insistance upon ext3 has cost them dearly - Oracle going exclusively with SUSE, and SUSE using Reiser, really puts Red Hat's Reiser instability claims to the fire. I've used the XFS version from SGI, and the file system is just great. Why Red Hat didn't go with this, I will never be able to understand.
Because of the Oracle issue, I'm probably heading towards SUSE - just haven't had the time to research it and start the migrations. Red Hat has drug their feet on WAY too many issues for FAR too long.
WTF is up with KDE? (Score:1)
Re:WTF is up with KDE? (Score:2, Funny)
Please RedHat, if you're reading, please make your distributions from the very latest alpha and beta versions, preferrably from developer snapshots done the day of the release. In the past your releases based on beta-quality code were wonderful and I'd hate to see you become another SuSE or Mandrake.
-Kevin
Re:WTF is up with RedHat? (Score:2)
The explanation for this (Score:5, Informative)
Or rather, it's because I didn't have the time to build the packages when the beta was current (if you've ever worked for a linux distributor, you know there are more important things to do a couple of days before a feature freeze...), and I don't think it makes much sense to build them now (now that the beta is pretty much obsolete).
That's precisely why I chose to put a recent CVS snapshot that should be pretty close to the 2.2 release in Roswell.
If you don't like it, send some of your spare time to bero@redhat.com.
Re:The explanation for this (Score:3, Insightful)
Bero: We haven't come up with a way to work more than 24 hours a day
No! Take it easy. Take your time and make a good product. If you rush it will come out crappy. Keep up the great work but have fun!
Hmm... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Hmm... (Score:1)
Re:Hmm... (Score:2)
Copid: the people in charge of Slashdot don't always claim to be or have to be "journalists" in the strictest sense
They do claim to be journalists.
Roblimo: Plus there is a little matter of keeping ads apart from editorial material, which is one of those silly ethics things only journalists who care about their personal integrity may notice, but that upset us to the point of irrationality when we spot them. (it's here [slashdot.org]).
Re:Hmm... (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously, that was pretty fuckin' uncalled for. I don't care how insecure RH may be out of the box compared to some other distros, but shit, Linux is Linux, right? You have to secure every distro, and AFAIK, none of them ship with a chrooted apache, bind, and sendmail (or better yet, qmail or postfix). Gimme a break.
Granted, I haven't used it yet, but I have yet to see or hear any evidence as to why apt-get is so much better than rpm -Fvh. Particularly when no commercial apps ship as
Some people will always find someting to bitch about. Case in point.
Re:Hmm... (Score:2)
Also, can you rpm -Fvh dist-upgrade to upgrade your distro? How about building a source package and automatically getting its build dependencies? Anyway, apt-get is a lot better than rpm (apt-get is also superior to dpkg). Apt is usesless on its own...it needs a package manager like to dpkg to the work of installing packages. So, it would be better to say that rpm -Fvh is better than dpkg -i or something.
Mandrake originally? (Score:2)
Re: Taco Bashing (Score:2)
Many of us are respected IT professionals, and many others like to think of ourselves as being intelligent, mature people. Let's try to act like it, eh?
Re:Hmm... (Score:2)
Re:Impressions (Score:2, Interesting)
If you think Taco's an asshole, try being on the receiving end of the amount of crap email he has to reply to every day.
Re:Impressions (Score:1, Troll)
Actually I did meet him at a trade show not long ago. I did find him kind of annoying. It was kind of dissappointing really, since I'm a big fan of Slashdot and a long-time user, I kind of pictured him as a cool guy.
Of course I didn't really get to know him well, maybe deep down he's thoughtful and interesting, but on the surface he was one of those guys who thinks putting everything down is funny and doesn't realize that it's just annoying. (I'm not overly sensitive to put-downs by the way, in the hands of a master they can be very funny, but Rob isn't a master.)
A lot of it might be just immaturity. Maybe in a few years he'll grow into a crazy, but interesting person like Stallman. (Who can also be annoying as hell, but once you get him to stop evangelizing actually has some interesting viewpoints.)
Re:Impressions (Score:3, Interesting)
He's a decent guy in person. I spent a couple of days around him, Chris Dibona [dibona.com], Krow [tangent.org], Pudge [pudge.org], and Patrick G. as well. They're all decent guys, and at least half of them are brilliant.
Maybe it's different 'cuz of my business dealings, but Malda sure wasn't a whiny prima-donna. He's got his opinions and all, but doesn't take himself too seriously (really!). I now have the impression half the stupid article comments are meant to poke fun at himself.
Besides that, he bought a round of drinks one night and supper another. (Of course, he probably did it to pay back Jim Gettys for the years of work on X11.)
I still wouldn't hire him to write software that anyone else would ever maintain, though.
Re:Impressions (Score:2)
That said, I expect he has no recollection of me whatsoever, as I'm merely YATBG (Yet Another Tall Bearded Guy) to most.
looks pretty nice.. (Score:3, Informative)
GNOME 1.4.x.. ... XFree 4.1.x.. nautulus(sp).. mozilla.. new config tools eventually phazing out linuxconf... easy GUI ISP dial tool..
I am running 7.1 right now and except for a few setup issues it is actually pretty good.
Hopefully they'll put mozill 9.3 in or the latest version of mozilla at the time of release...
Re:Ext3??? (Score:2)
Journaling filesystems are sort of the elite in the business. They're what filesystems like FAT and ext2 want to grow up into. They're also essential for big enterprise server where data integrity is a priority.
The idea behind journal filesystems comes from big databases like Oracle. Database operations quite often include several related and dependent sub-operations. The failure of any one operation means that the entire operation is invalid and any changes made to the database are rolled back. Journal filesystems use a similar system.
A journal log file is maintained on the partition. Filesystem writes are first written to the log file. If a write operation is interrupted due to the machine unexpectedly going down -- power failure, crash -- then at the next boot, the journal log file is read and operations are rolled back. This process takes only a few seconds to few minutes rather than the hours that a `fsck' can possibly take, on larger servers.
For more info on journaling read here -> http://www.linuxgazette.com/issue55/florido.html
RedHat denies! (Score:5, Funny)
Meanwhile RedHat believers rush to FTP sites, trying to gather evidence that it indeed was a real distro that had entered these servers.
Another coverup? Only time will tell.
Re:RedHat denies! (Score:2)
Schweeet! (Score:2)
Most of my machines are running (patched) 7.1, but I do have a few still on 7.0. I'm really looking forward to 7.2 final, but I'll sure use the beta right away. One of my friends is still using 6.2, heh.
Hey! (Score:2)
Yeah yeah, I bought a few at today's low-low prices because I'm not out a whole lot if they go under and I think that of the Linux companies, they have a pretty good chance of success. I pity the people who got in at the IPO price and didn't sell when they went over $100, though...
And that was what kind of comment? (Score:5, Insightful)
Normally I try to ignore the biased comments that creep up in the stories here, but the snippy little comments, regardless of the topic, have become a bit much lately.
Re:And that was what kind of comment? (Score:3, Interesting)
"Like a madman shooting firebrands or deadly arrows is a man who deceives his neighbor and says, 'I was only joking!'" -- Proverbs 26:18-19
Sometimes the Bible is surprisingly relevant.
(BTW, this comment is not intended as a troll; it's just that few people know the Bible has anything to say about the whole "just kidding" thing. Though I fear I may spark a long offtopic thread anyway. Apologies in advance if such a thread ensues.)
Re:And that was what kind of comment? (Score:2)
Jeez... I can't believe how many people fell for this. It was obviously a deliberately snide comment intended to produce posts exactly like yours. I've never seen a more obvious attempt to "rattle some cages" than this and /. editors routinely post flamebait on purpose!! You and 50,000 other /.ers seem to have fallen for it yet again.
Next time you see some ridiculously inflammatory comment by an editor (Apple and one button mice anyone?)... stop before you flame back and wonder if they aren't all laughing their asses off at the lot of you. I know I am. :)
Re:And that was what kind of comment? (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree, this IS horriblly elitist. Yes, Debian is the most "ideologically pure" Linux distro (which I admire), but it's the HARDEST for any non-expert to get any use out of. As a systems engineer, my job is not to impose ideology, but to impliment the best solution, which in the Linux world is Red Hat.
Red Hat is in my experience the best distro for a server, which is what I use 7.1 for. However, I do use Mandrake on my desktop machine, but then that is what Mandrake is INTENDED for.
The press release was REALLY cool, and the name "Roswell" is way cool. Too bad they didn't save that for the final...
Slackware is harder (Score:1)
With these lightweight distrobutions, you never get your hands dirty, expect when fighting with the package manager.
Slack does not have package dependencies. I guess pat is either too slack or too wise to start messing with dependencies. You're just supposed to read the prerequisites and deal with it yourself. No fancy, smancy automation. Just what you need for a nice, stable server.
My slack server has been up straight about 8 months, going on 9.
Re:And that was what kind of comment? (Score:2)
Taco, (Score:2, Flamebait)
Snide: Expressive of contempt
You almost did. And besides, we don't give a flying fuck what you do, and do not use. Get over it.
There is no Roswell! (Score:5, Interesting)
;-)
I love the style of the writing of the press release:
Etc.Too bad we can't say the same about XP
Re:There is no Roswell! (analysis) (Score:1, Offtopic)
Also, I heard when you bootup the new beta, it plays a Dido
Official denial: There's no Roswell either (Score:3, Funny)
It's ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/beta/roswel
See? It's roswell!
Dido? I thought upgrading to XP would be painful! (Score:2)
Comments like this (Score:2, Insightful)
The newbie feels dejected, sees the community as a bunch of arrogant geeks (i guess we mainly are?) and goes back to windows where Everyone is willing to help him.
While it seems most of the linux community is realizing this, and is starting to work together to make linux a more newbie friendly place, less distro fanaticism and more helping hands, its quite suprising to see
Re:Comments like this (Score:1)
The only way linux's user base will spread is through the tolerance of newbies. Yes, that means some people will have to put up with some dumb questions (RTFM!), but it pays off in the end.
.2 Redhat releases (Score:2, Informative)
The X.2 releases of Redhat are usually pretty refined. There is not much ground breaking stuff in here, just evolution of the existing packages (gcc 3.0 is not used by default, just included in addition to 2.96).
2.4.6 is now included, as is Xfree 4.1.0 and Gnome 1.4
RH 7.1 is already a pretty nice distribution. It will be interesting to see what the installer changes look like.
Re:.2 Redhat releases (Score:1)
2.4.6 is now included
I am a little worried about that. Kernel 2.4.6 still has some "issues" regarding virtual memory.
The 2.4.7 pre-releases seems to fix that. Do anyone know if theres a chance RedHat will upgrade to 2.4.7 before the final release of 7.2 ?
the best thing about X.2... (Score:2)
If 8.0 isn't stable, what's the point? (Score:2)
How is that cool? Most linux users use it as a server OS, where stability is everything and coolness matters not a whit. Myself, I use Red Hat in "embedded-type" applications such as MP3 jukeboxes, really cheap pc-based DVD players, etc. And the big advantage Linux has over windows on the desktop is its improved stability. What is the point of unstable linux in the name of coolness?
Re:.2 Redhat releases (Score:3, Interesting)
They didn't have an option on this. Red Hat have always maintained binary compatibility throughout major version numbers, so shipping with anything other than 2.96-RH as the default compiler just wasn't an option. Naturally, they've supplied 3.0 for those that want to use it. I can't really fault RH about this -- they've done exactly as they said they would. Can you imagine the uproar if they'd broken their promises on binary compatibility?
usability? (Score:2)
Obviously, there are some new things, like filesystems, that frankly, won't affect me in the least.
My concerns lie more with some interface things that are holding me back from using Linux. Not having come from a Unix background, I have no experience compiling software, understanding file permissions, etc. Does 7.2 do anything to address the needs of newer users?
Re:usability? (Score:3, Interesting)
7.2 includes more packages than any of the previous releases, so chances you'll actually have to compile something on your own are lower.
File permissions etc. are still there (and will stay) - but they're not really complicated once you've understood them. Basically, a file can be read, written and executed (think of the third as renaming a file from test to test.exe on that other operating system - it's done differently, but the effect is pretty much the same) - each of the operations can be allowed or denied. The file managers in KDE and GNOME give you a GUI frontend to changing permissions, so you don't need to remember commands like "chmod o+rw test" or "chmod 4777
Try it, and let me know if you're seeing any usability problems - I'd like to fix them, but noticing them after you've used Linux for 10 years is quite tricky.
Re:usability? (Score:2)
Bernard, first, let me thank you for replying to my original question.
I feel I must address your comment above, however. Consider this from a total newbie user perspective: perhaps they are an intermediate level Windows or Mac user, but have never tried Linux. There is NO way you can honestly believe that Linux doesn't have usability problems.
I think after using Linux for 10 years, you are experiencing the "can't see the forest for the trees" phenomenon. I don't know how you get around this. I've spent a lot of time trying to convince geeks that Linux is too hard, and most of them don't believe you.
I see alot of this in my job where I work with database developers building web applications. Frequently I will say "why did you put this button here?" or "why does this component work this way?". Almost always, their response is that "the user will understand that". Well, the problem is that the user DOES NOT understand! The developers are capable of fixing it, but they don't even see the problem in the first place!
Does RedHat even HAVE any usability testers? If not, you should have a Vice President of Usability, along with a staff to assist them. I can assure you that Microsoft and Apple do, and it shows.
Re:usability? (Score:3, Informative)
If you are coming from Windows with zero knowledge of Linux - them you might try Mandrake at first. Mandrake is much better suited to people who don't know linux and don't want to mess with the command line...
Now - in terms of usability tests - both GNOME and KDE are doing usability tests. Sun did it for GNOME and the KDE team did look at the Sun results and they did their own on LinuxTag in europe and keep doing so in shows - if you're going to LinuxWorld - then you're welcome to visit the KDE booth and make your remarks - comments are always welcome.
As for your comment "can't see the forest for the trees" - I know exactly what you mean, been there before - and I know lots of others did - and they give advice here and there about usability.
You are of course always welcome to join KDE or GNOME team and give advice or a hint or participate in the desktop enviroment development - people that can point out some wrong GUI decision are always welcome - as long as they are willing to EXPLAIN what is wrong and suggest an alternative (programming knowledge is not necessary)
Re:usability? (Score:2)
You're all very welcome to join.
Re:usability? (Score:2)
To be honest, once Linux has been installed, setup, accounts assigned, etc... I find something like KDE entirely usable. My problems with the system are more like this - Sound card not detected at install, 'oh, that's easy to fix, run sndconfig at the shell' (what's a shell?), sound card gets detected and finally works (if it can detect it, why didn't it do it when I installed?) That kind of thing.
Or bad x configuration (user error, whatever) that results in the GUI not working. Now you have newbie trying to fix it on a command line! That kind of stuff. It needs to be more foolproof.
Re:usability? (Score:2)
We do autodetect PCI soundcards these days - ISA probing is always dangerous (can crash the machine), that's why we aren't doing that at installation time.
If you're using RHL >= 7.1 with KDE, you have the "kontrol-panel" link on the desktop (if you're not using KDE, install the kdeadmin package and run kontrol-panel manually) - it provides a link to all system configuration tools (including sndconfig).
Or bad x configuration (user error, whatever) that results in the GUI not working.
This is true - but it's all but easy to fix.
The fix that immediately comes to mind is using a framebuffer kernel and running X with the framebuffer driver only - that would get rid of this issue, but it would also get rid of nice features like XAA or DRI - so it's definitely not the right thing to do.
If you have a better suggestion to fix this, please let me know.
Re:usability? (Score:1)
Re:usability? (Score:2)
If you do, a lot of odd things can happen, especially when switching back and forth between X and text mode.
Re:usability? (Score:2)
Where, O where, is the source to kontrol-panel? I was building my own KDE from source the other day (yeah, before rawhide updated to 2.2-cvs) and I couldn't find the kontrol-panel source code anywhere for the life of me!
Re:usability? (Score:2)
Distro wars are a waste of time (Score:2, Insightful)
I have been running Linux since November or December of 1991. I've seen just about every distro that's ever been out starting with HJ Lu's boot/root floppies. Why myst people waste so much time an effors on distro bashing? It's Linux! That's all that matters. I have tried all of the "big 7" (see LWN's Distro page [lwn.net]) from their early releases to date. When it comes down to what counts there is no significent difference between them! They all work and work well. They will do the job that needs to be done if you have a resonably compitent SysAdmin to run them. Just like any other *NIX. I've also used Free/Net/OpenBSD and Solaris any they also work. If all the energy that is currentlly used to rant about Distros/OS/Licenses was put towards constructive things the world would be saying "Micro-WHO?" right now.
I know no one is going to actually listen to me. But I'll keep tilting at windmills till I can't ride any more.
Re:Can't wait... (Score:5, Informative)
There are 2 reasons why we're still using 2.96 even though 3.0 has been released.
The first is binary compatibility - gcc 3.0 is not binary compatible with anything else, and we don't break binary compatibility between minor releases.
The second is that 2.96 is way more stable than the 3.0 release (though the current 3.0 branch in CVS works somewhat better). If you've ever tried compiling KDE with gcc 3.0, you'll know what I mean.
I don't think you can come up with any program that uses correct code and doesn't work with gcc 2.96 - if you can, report it [redhat.com] so we can fix it. If you can't, don't complain.
The final will include KDE 2.2 and a proper compiler (namely 2.96
Re:Can't wait... (Score:2)
If so hopefully it will be out in time for Red Hat 8.0, so we won't have to go through another 3 releases with a compiler that is well behind the current. If they ship 8.0 with gcc3 and gcc3.1 ships in the middle of the year, they'll probably ship 8.1 and 8.2 with gcc3.0. That probably puts us into 2003. Ouch.
Re:Can't wait... (Score:2, Interesting)
I link to kgcc on all redhats I use. Yes, egcs/gcc 2.9.1/112. or whatever kgcc is.
The first reason is the linux kernel is recommended to be compiled with that release and the second is that 2.96 was an experimental 3.0alpha fork. It is broken, deprecated and gcc and stallman were so pissed redhat had used it in a wide release product.
I have redhat 7.1 with gcc 3.0 in
I like Slackware 8.0 for workstation use, at work we stuck with redhat 7.0 (with all the updates of course). I recommend that for server use (7.1 did some weird stuff around java). I also use kgcc -> gcc/cc sym links as the binaries produced by that compiler are "real," that 2.96 is a horror show.
The 3.0 gcc is also better at ansi/posix/whatever else, i currently have 2.4.7 running perfectly compiled from that, as well as xfree 4.1.0. I think KDE is a nice UI, but it has "dirty closed roots" and do not consider it a valid project (YET
CHeers to redhat for trying, but i vote NO one the lame 2.96 fork
-Z
no one reads comments (Score:1)
uuugh
jez this system is stupid if no one mods and just relies on the +2 to get them above the crowd it end up like the jounels with IMPACT factor rateings stupid
regards
john jones
That's because your code is broken (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Can't wait... (Score:4, Interesting)
Here is a list of gcc-3.0 improvements [gnu.org] over gcc-2.95.3. As for myself, I really appreciate the libstdc++-3.0 support.
I am less than enthusiatic about the
New warnings for C code that may have undefined semantics because of violations of sequence point rules in the C standard (such as a = a++;, a[n] = b[n++]; and a[i++] = i;), included in -Wall.
OMS/LiVid [linuxvideo.org] code, in particular, trips this up.
Re:Can't wait... (Score:1)
I for one would not like to have to wait for Ximian to release yet another format (even though they picked up Redhat 7.0 pretty quick), let alone everyone else. I mean, look how slow the new RPM format picked up.
I like the warning (Score:1)
I'm glad to hear that this warning has been added. I maintain an open source random number generator [umich.edu] and the generation routine ran incorrectly when compiled with gcc-2.96. Fortunately a user ran the verification tests and figured out that my routines relied on a certain sequence of a[i++]=i evaluations. All the compilers that I had tested with used the same sequence, but the C standard leaves it implementation-dependent.
If a certain program raises these warnings, then it's best to know so it can be fixed. Otherwise it's likely to compile wrong on certain systems.
AlpineR
Re:Can't wait... (Score:2)
We don't want to break binary compatibility between to minor releases, and we need a stable compiler. 3.0 isn't one yet. Try compiling KDE (from CVS) with it, and you'll see.
Almost all of the improvements you listed are already in 2.96, by the way - in fact, they're the reasons we've decided to go with 2.96 rather than 2.95.x in 7.0.
Re:Can't wait... (Score:2)
GCC 2.96 is an unofficial version of the gcc 3.0 development code that Red Hat released because of their substantial ability to support the code (being as they employ a significant number of the world's gcc hackers) and their customers' demands for better standards support in C++. GCC 2.96 was unstable initially only in a few small areas, and they were fixed way back in 7.0 updates. I've never ever had a problem with 7.1.
If you want to hate Red Hat, I suppose its compiler is as good a place as any to start a rant, but it's not a broken or unstable compiler. In fact, it's a much better compiler than gcc 2.95 in some pretty dramatic areas (standards compliance, non-x86 support, etc).
I think you need to re-evaluate what you mean by "unstable" and "gcc", since gcc 2.96 did start life as an honest-to-goodness development snapshot of gcc, and was brought to you by the very same folks that gave you egcs.
gcc 3.0 (Score:2)
Re:Another update? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Another update? (Score:2, Informative)
It's only painful if you're in a hurry. (Score:2)
Re:Another update? (Score:2)
But I thought Linux was produced by persons doing it for the good of the computer community? Isn't that what Linux/GPL is all about? Do they really just want money?
Re:Another update? (Score:1)
Re:Another update? (Score:2)
Check it out sometimes: www.beta.redhat.com
Re:Another update? (Score:1)
Re:Mandrake 8.1 coming soon? (Score:1)
Of course, I'm a KDE developer, so I'm biased...
Re:Mandrake 8.1 coming soon? (Score:1)
Re:Mandrake 8.1 coming soon? (Score:2)
Don't you mean Mandrake 9?
They always bump up their release numbers for no apparent reason, other than having the highest number ;-)
Re:Mandrake 8.1 coming soon? (Score:2)
Re:Mounting a floppy? (Score:2)
If you're in text mode,
mount
Re:Mounting a floppy? (Score:1)
Re:For those that actually care about this stuff.. (Score:2)
Re:For those that actually care about this stuff.. (Score:3, Informative)
7.1 was released, 7.2 will be. I could tell you the release date, but I'd have to kill you afterwards.
Re:i posted it 3 days ago... (Score:1)
Re:Interesting that I got rejected for this story (Score:3, Informative)
Huh?? (Score:2)
Should it be? (Score:2)
After all, being a beta, if there are major bugs found, they may have to make enough significant changes that Ximian would spend too much time catching up. Better to wait until the release.