Binary incompatibility of Linux distributions

[Derek Broughton]

Florian Diesch wrote:

> Dotan Cohen <dotancohen at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>> Canonical never promised to provide a bug-free OS or fix this kind of
>>> bugs in time, and they don't have the resources to do so.
>>>
>> Do we need a promise of a bug-free OS before we can complain about bugs?
> 
> I never told you not to complain about bugs.
> 
> 
>>> Canonical is not the creator but the distributor of that software.
>>
>> Exactly. They choose to ship known-faulty software, which replaced
>> working software.
> 
> AFAIK the issue was discovered to late to revert to an older version.

I'm not sure about that, but there's a difference between "known-faulty 
software" and "known faulty-software", if you see my point.  If there was 
some specific software known to be at fault, they could have fixed it.  Or 
reverted to known-working software.  But if you don't know which part is the 
problem you are stuck with a bunch of uninviting options - the only one I 
can imagine working to solve the graphics problems would be to delay the 
release of Jaunty.  On balance, since Jaunty with graphics problems is 
better than Intrepid without, imo, they made the right decision.
-- 
derek