Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 4 Oct 2000 01:15:09 -0400 (EDT) | From | Alexander Viro <> | Subject | Re: Why does everyone hate gcc 2.95? |
| |
On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Larry McVoy wrote:
> hand picked tests. No faster. Just compiles slower. Add to that > some distributions BRAINDEAD default of havving colorgcc be the default > compiler (can you say fork perl to fork gcc? Can you say STUPID?), and
ITYM "cute". As in "cute dancing paperclip". As colourized ls. Or rm aliased to rm -i for root. Or 31337 cAp1tAl1z3d directory names in root. Or manpages in HTML (yes, today I had to touch Slowlaris too, why are you asking?) Or info crap verbose as "War and Peace" instead of manpages. Or --ignore-fail-on-non-empty as rmdir option. Or "let's replace config files with directories full of one-liners since packagers can't be arsed to learn sed(1)" religion. Sigh...
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |