[MPlayer-users] Re: (flame) FAQ entry concerning gcc 2.96

lanzz at lanzz.org lanzz at lanzz.org
Tue Oct 23 09:47:46 CEST 2001

i'm not a mplayer developer, but i understand their position on this quite well...

> If so, why all the stupid childish barriers during compilation? This does 
> nothing but damage your reputation. A simple RUN-TIME warning would be 
> enough.

it would be FAR from enough. there were countless (well, not countless, but
about 50) reports about compilation problems, even with included gcc output, which
clearly included a message that it is an internal gcc bug, there was a link how
to report it back to gcc, etc, but STILL they just sent it here. and that's only
for the time i've been subscribed to this list (several months).

> Anyway you guys seem to be way too stubborn on the issue. Can't you just 
> accept that gcc 2.96 is not buggier than gcc 3.x? Or is this one of these 
> "Red Hat is evil, we gotta blame them for something, even if it's entirely 
> made up"? 

as far as i can remember, mplayer compilation doesn't favour gcc 3.x either...

More information about the MPlayer-users mailing list