On Mon, 2003-08-25 at 21:14, Philipp Thomas wrote:
Ernesto Jardim
[Mon, 25 Aug 2003 11:08:50 +0100]: I think SuSE has to be blamed for this because I'm using their distribution
Oh, so a distributor is to blame for using a compiler which older software doesn't recognize? Or a compiler that won't accept code older versions did? You can't be serious.
The only point I would accept is that a distributor *could* be blamed for distributing a compiler that runs into internal errors, be the reason real compiler errors or errors in the code.
and no one complained about lyx code (it's a quite old and mature project).
That doesn't mean a thing. Now that gcc 3.3 has turned on alias based optimization in -O2, I get quite a few places where the compiler warns about code that isn't standard conforming and that can lead to non functioning code. Many programmers (myself included) work by the rule "if the compiler doesn't give errors or warnings the code is OK".
The reason is that this happened allready with 8.1 and I've submitted a bug report to suse that replied thanking me but saying that they couldn't do nothing about it.
I'd like to see answer. I doubt we couldn't do anything. If you have problems with our compiler, go to http://www.suse.de/feedback and give us the data we need to verify and possibly fix the bug. As for what we need see http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html#detailed . If we can reproduce the bug we *will* try to fix the bug.
Philipp
Hi,
I'm not going into more discussion with you about who's to blame about
this problem or whatever happens with the gcc versions. Other people is
able to compile LyX 1.3.2 in their computers, as was reported in this
mailing list.
I'm not a technical expert, I'm a linux user for a long time now (since
kernel 1.0.27) and when I buy a product I expect it to work. This didn't
happen with SuSE 8.1 (neither with SuSE 8.2) and I've submitted a
support request and a bug report with all the data SuSE requested.
The answer to the support request was that it was outside the scope of
the free support and that I should buy a different support licence
(Ticket [20030205000001236]). Regarding the bug report (Ticket
[20030206990000197]) I never got any message with the result (was SuSE
able to reproduce the situation ?).
In my opinion this is a commercial problem. I'm a costumer since version
5.1. I made very little support requests during this years, so if I
report a problem I'm expecting to be taken seriously. This caused me
delays in my work that I was not expecting and still I could not solve
the compiling problems.
In the end of the day, in my perspective, I bought a product that didn't
work and SuSE was not able to help me and tried to sell an advanced
support licence.
Whether you like it or not I blame SuSE for this! and it's my decision
to move to other distribution if SuSE is unable to provide me the same
quality products I was used.
Regards
EJ
--
Ernesto Jardim