I was corrected on this issue several times. Thanks for the reply! I
had not known. I had problems with the first rattle out of the box for RH
5.0, and followed the comments on the list that gave me this impression.
It appears that this impression was due to murphy stepping in with the
exact number of things that must go wrong to make me chuck it for a while.
I have to be productive in my own little way.
I am now looking forward to 5.2. Somewhere around that time I
will be increasing cpu speed and disk size to take advantage of the whole
shebang. 90mzh pentium/64meg with only 3 gig hd is not enough! It is
nice to know I was wrong and will be able to run my old binaries.
bug
On Fri, 13 Mar 1998, Cristian Gafton wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Mar 1998, Bug Hunter wrote:
>
> > I second and third that. Unfortunately, because you did _NOT_ provide
> > backward compatibility of any sort, I was unable to put 5.0 into
> > production. I _will_ _not_ put RH 5.1 or 5.2 or 5.x into production unless
> > I can figure out ways to support older libc5 programs that may never be
> > updated. (Not all linux software is freeware, surprise!) Going to 5.0
> > actually would have bankrupted me had I installed it on production systems
> > when it came out.
>
> What do you mean by not supporting backward compatibility ? Netscape,
> StarOffice 4.0.
>
> What applications are you talking about ? Please quit making this general
> bigus statements and get to the facts, please.
>
> We _are_ listening.
>
> Cristian
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject.
