OFB Community Mailing Lists

[Karl Kleinpaste]

Eduardo Sánchez <lists at sombragris.org> writes:
> No I won't. There's just one reminder: gcc-2.96 in RH 7.0.

Let's see...  I could have sworn I addressed this, didn't I?  Hm.  Let
me look -- yup, there it is:

>> There have been
>> good reasons to complain at them now and again

And while you're entitled to believe that gcc 2.96 was a reason for such
complaint, I would argue that you're wrong even on technical grounds,
much less social grounds.

More to the point, however, RH7 was a decade in the past.  It appears
you don't believe that a sinner could ever convert.  Got any example
that hasn't already ossified, and grown a fine sheen of moss besides?
Since you said "there's just one" above, evidently not.

Such whining is still over the top, and not reflective of what I see in
the trenches, because that's where I am today.  Most of Fedora package
management is quite good.  Yes, they do patches beyond upstream content.
Funny, they have good reason for those patches just about all the time.
It's not like they wake up in the morning and decide, "Hey, let's screw
over package XYZ today."  Yes, they test.  Yes, they sometimes let a bug
slip through (e.g. about a month ago, NetworkManager's SIGSEGV death in
a conflict with VMware).  This is not an indication of systemic flaw;
this is an indication of an occasional -- very occasional -- QA glitch.