lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Mar]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [OFFTOPIC]: MS Porting Office to Linux?
On Wed, Mar 17, 1999 at 11:15:07AM +0100, Harald Koenig wrote:

> pardon me, but is 2.1 released at all ?

Yes.

> suggesting commercial/serious developers to use the
> latest/greated/internally-released/work-in-progress/for-
> -your-eyes-only/to-be-updated-tomorrow version of glibc isn't what
> I'd think is the best for the image of Linux as stable, rock solid
> and upward-compatible system.

glibc 2.0 was (according to the web page I read yesterday) supposed to be
a developers release only. glibc 2.1 is/was intended to be the stable
release.

> I'm really disapointed to see "get the every single latest flee from the bazar"
> way of thinking -- it's not fun at all if you're trying to get real work done
> with Linux.

So use vi and *roff :)

> some netscape 4.0x and 4.5 versions for glibc 2.0.x with more
> recent glibc versions (don't remember exact version), and
> all tested combinations chocked horribly, so I just stepped back
> from pre-2.1 at that time. haven't tried again since then though...

Developers releases won't necessarily be backwardly / binary compatible.
Stable releases are / should be.

--
There was a young man of St. John's / Who wanted to bugger the swans. /
But the loyal hall porter / Said, "Pray take my daughter! /
Those birds are reserved for the dons."

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:50    [W:4.553 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site