-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Well, concidering that SuSE are major contributors to GCC (which they *never* get credit for) and the fact that they are so damn conservative when it comes to adding things to the distro that make major changes then I wouldn't worry about it. GCC 3.3 is just about to be released as stable or so I've heard...I'm sure they tested it inside and out before doing this. What I've heard from various SuSE people is that they pretty much put a halt to the " let's add new features " mentality for this release and just concentrated on making it stable as hell. I think they took to heart what all of us wrote and said about 8.0/8.1 and got their act together for this release. This might be one of those run forever releases. :)
Well, I've installed serveral 3rd party packages/progs and not one issue yet. I have done both rpms. and tarballs and all went well . I would have to agree with Bens take on this. To be sure there are refinements with this version. I had the distinct impression that this versions is more about putting it all together in a more stable and yet flexible format. Considering that 2.6 will be around the corner in a short while (ok - ya famous last words). I would say they are focusing on getting the 2.4.x offerings shored up, because they know that certain poeple have needs for some of the new drivers and features that the later versions of 2.4 offer, but don't want to jump whole hog into a new kernel. Like I posted before. The beta 3 I'm running closed out fairly quickly. By the time I went to file a bug report someone (or a few) had already done so and it was assigned/addressed - so I really couldn't add anything different to expand on these reports. I would go back to check on these and found they were mostly solved in a fairly quick manner. So, I really didn't do alot in the 2nd round [lol] (the betas were labelled with odd numbers for external shake downs, e.g 1, 3, 5....). I'm sure there well be a couple of issues that "may" show up, but over all I was surprised at how little conflict I experienced. I had expected something along the lines as no boots, hard crashes, etc... I got none of that. The problems I encountered that had any real significance presented itself in beta1 and by the next beta weren't evident and from my experience a non-issue hence forth. I'm not writing code from scratch and compiling, so if there is any sort of issues related to this I wouldn't know. But, as I said before, I have had no probs with any Makefiles to date. Cheers, Curtis. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+cjP57WVLiDrqeksRAuApAJ9diZMaAbYFXs7yseGcjOEI2gr81gCgnVg7 ORdqKdoq1uO/Hn5M1gV11Kk= =/4So -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----