From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id KAA23697; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 10:26:47 +0100 (MET) Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA23795 for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 10:26:46 +0100 (MET) Received: from smtpzilla2.xs4all.nl (smtpzilla2.xs4all.nl [194.109.127.138]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fBL9QjP08402 for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 10:26:46 +0100 (MET) Received: from beertje.william.bogus (williamc.xs4all.nl [213.84.56.92]) by smtpzilla2.xs4all.nl (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id fBL9Qisp010960; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 10:26:44 +0100 (CET) Received: (from williamc@localhost) by beertje.william.bogus (8.11.2/8.11.2/SuSE Linux 8.11.1-0.5) id fBL9Pr101467; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 10:25:53 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: beertje.william.bogus: williamc set sender to williamc@paneris.org using -f From: William Chesters MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15395.32.822225.243126@beertje.william.bogus> Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 10:25:52 +0100 (CET) To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Segv while compiling ocaml-3.04 In-Reply-To: <20011221092252.B6254@hars> References: <3C19BAB4.13372263@univ-savoie.fr> <20011220115014.B5544@pauillac.inria.fr> <86u1ul5wya.fsf@speakeasy.org> <20011221092252.B6254@hars> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Florian Hars writes: > On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 02:49:17PM -0800, Ian Zimmerman wrote: > > Is it worth polluting the source for the sake of an out-and-out vendor > > bug? I'd say no. > > There is a clean solution to this problem, as implemented in the > configure-script of mplayer [...] > > if test "$cc_verc_fail" ; then > cat < > *** Please downgrade/upgrade C compiler to gcc-2.95.x or gcc-3.x version! *** > > GCC 2.96 IS NOT AND WILL NOT BE SUPPORTED BY US ! > EOF > die "Bad gcc version" Luckily the ocaml team are much too sensible to go this way. For those who are tempted, take a look at http://www.linuxworld.com/site-stories/2001/1214.mplayer.html "... boorish developers who think of themselves as a sort of intellectual jeunesse doree ... The attitude I mentioned earlier was noticeable in the comments on the project's page at freshmeat, ... in the MPlayer team's remarks about gcc 2.96 ... Actually, the team's infamous anti-Red Hat rhetoric has been toned down slightly. At Red Hat's request, some false statements the developers made about 2.96 have been removed from MPlayer's Web site. The team still lets you know at every opportunity what they think of Red Hat, which gets tiresome fast." Basically this approach is absolutely guaranteed to give the impression that you are over-fussy, arrogant, inconsiderate of real users' needs etc. RedHat is too big to ignore and get away with it: every time they pull some stunt like this, lots of developers waste lots of time and credibility attempting to convince users that it's All Red Hat's Fault---eventually succeeding only to discover that the users still blame them not RH. My €1E-2. ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr