glibc 2.0.8

[H.J. Lu]

> 
> hjl@lucon.org (H.J. Lu) writes:
> 
> > Anything in CVS is better than so called glibc 2.0.7, which some people
> > seem to think is working fine. I am not talking about fixing all bugs.
> > I just want to see egcs can co-exist with glibc 2.0.x.
> 
> Everybody should use 2.1 instead.  Releasing a 2.0.x simply gives a
> completely wrong signal.  2.1 is much more stable than 2.0 ever was.
> 

Please tell that to Jeff Law. Yes, I have tried :-(.

-- 
H.J. Lu (hjl@gnu.org)