Re: gcc 2.91.66, 2.95.3, 2.95.4, growfs -- off-topic

[Bryan-TheBS-Smith <b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx>]

Sidik Isani wrote:
> Doesn't RedHat OWN Cygnus?

Yes.  But that doesn't necessarily mean that the GCC maintainers and
GNU Pro guys (i.e. Cygnus) agree with the acts of the distro
assemblers and testers (i.e. RedHat Linux).  ;-PPP

This is not Microsoft where NT developers end up being "Chicago"'s
(i.e. MS-DOS 7.x + Windows 4.x -- i.e. Windows 95) "bitch" without
any say.  ;-PPP

OSS developers and teams speak their mind, _before_ things get out
of hand.

-- TheBS

-- 
Bryan "TheBS" Smith    mailto:b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx   chat:thebs413
Engineer  AbsoluteValue Systems, Inc.  http://www.linux-wlan.org
President     SmithConcepts, Inc.   http://www.SmithConcepts.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
Web site defacements are as much of a national security risk as
inner city kids spray painting.  There is nothing of value, and
nothing that can't be fixed with a little re-paint.  You'd have
to have the equivalent stupidity of someone parking an F-18 in
downtown LA.  Even then, the only damage would be a new scheme!
The US government wants life imprisonment for such "terrorism."