| To: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Xfs Compile problem |
| From: | Joseph Fannin <jhf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 22 Jun 2001 10:08:52 -0400 |
| In-reply-to: | <20010621104429.A13589@wwweasel.geeksrus.net>; from alane@geeksrus.net on Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 10:44:29AM -0400 |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.33.0106211632380.7224-100000@sneezy.ekky.org> <20010621104429.A13589@wwweasel.geeksrus.net> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.2.5i |
> If it's RH gcc-2.96, then you can bugzilla it (http://bugzilla.redhat.com), > but given that 3.0 is out it probably won't get fixed in 2.96. In the past, RedHat has always released three minor versions of each major -- i.e. 5.0, 5.1, 5.2; 6.0, 6.1, 6.2. If RedHat decides to release a version 7.2 of their distribution, it *will* ship with 2.96 -- they won't break binary compatiblity within a major release series. I'm not saying XFS development effort should be directed at 2.96, but I don't think it's going to go away just yet. (Please, no beating of the 2.96-is-bad dead horse.) -- Joseph Fannin jhf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx "Bull in pure form is rare; there is usually contamination by data." -- William Graves Perry Jr. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: xfs_force_shutdown, Steve Lord |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | 1.0.1 PR1 stability, Alan Eldridge |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Xfs Compile problem, Reggy Ekkebus |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Xfs Compile problem, Seth Mos |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |