Re: Fixed libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2 package
Thus spake Brian Nelson (nelson@bignachos.com):
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Fixed libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2 package
> From: Brian Nelson <nelson@bignachos.com>
> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 12:43:50 -0800
> X-Mailing-List: <debian-user@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/245335
>
> Patrick Lane <patrick.m.lane@csun.edu> writes:
>
> > On Thu, 2002-11-14 at 11:05, Craig Dickson wrote:
> >
> >> Seriously, for your own sake (and this is the generic
> >> "you", I'm not addressing Paul specifically, as I don't know what he can
> >> or can't do for himself), why run unstable, which is _intended_ as a
> >> place for leading-edge testing -- "catch it here before it breaks
> >> something really important" -- if you aren't able to deal with the
> >> problems that sooner or later _will_ arise?
> >>
> >> Craig
> >
> > Some of us using unstable use it because we have to. That is, we have to
> > if we want to run Debian. For example, I installed unstable for XF86
> > 4.2. w/o it, I had to do a mickey mouse work-around to get my xserver to
> > start, which to me is way worse.
> >
> > I think your point of view on people running unstable only if they can
> > fix these 'basic' problems that arise is foolhearty. The more people
> > using unstable, the more bugs that are found, reported, and eventually
> > fixed for future stable releases.
>
> As long as you don't mind the occasional breakage, I don't think running
> unstable is a bad idea for a lot of users. After all, breaking your
> system and then figuring out how to fix it is a great way to learn how
> it all works.
This is where I fall. I don't "need" unstable and probably only want it
on one of my desktops but I like it spread around for the new and neat
things. I also understand I'm probably going to deal with some nasty
breaks. I've only seen what, 2 total in the last 6-9 months? Hell, I
wish "production stable" windows had so few.
> The 10+ duplicate bug reports filed against libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2 was a
> bit much, though libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2 doesn't have the longevity of
> man-db and the duplicate bugs filed for "man -k" segfaults. Poor
Why I just sent a "fix" to the list early this morning hoping to cut
some fo those off. When I do run into something like this that I don't
have a quick fix on I try to see if someone else has one before filing
bugs, etc.
:wq!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert L. Harris | PGP Key ID: FC96D405
DISCLAIMER:
These are MY OPINIONS ALONE. I speak for no-one else.
FYI:
perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5,(41*2),sqrt(7056),(unpack(c,H)-2),oct(115),10);'
Reply to: