[Gllug] Red Hat versus other qualifications

[Dave Cross]

On 01/07/2009 14:35, Richard Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 12:15:29PM +0100, Joel Bernstein wrote:

>> Red Hat seem to have released more broken Perls than any other vendor
>> I've dealt with.
>
> I think by "more broken Perls" you mean "one broken Perl".

Actually, I think it's two now. There was a case back in Red Hat 8 or 
something like that where they included an RC of Perl and removed the 
"RC" from the version number so people didn't realise they were using a 
pre-release version. I remember p5p getting quite wound up against it, 
but I don't recall it actually causing anyone any problems.

But you're certainly right that people make more of these examples than 
they should. I've used RH-based distributions almost exclusively on both 
desktops and servers for ten years now. I always use the 
system-installed Perl and it has never caused me a problem. And I should 
probably point out that I'm a Perl developer so I make heavy use of the 
installed version of Perl.

Cheers,

Dave...
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug