* Reply to a msg from Murray Lesser @ 1:109/347 on 11-04-99        
 
 ML> As any programmer knows, it is impossible to test complex 
 ML> software to the point that one can guarantee that it is bug 
 ML> free.  (A very old programmer's adage is that the only bug-free 
 ML> software is software that is no longer in use!)  This is 
 
Awwww, geeze another old programmer with excuses on why software can't be
tested in all situations and all configurations.  Let's get to a discussion on 
regression testing? 
 
 ML> of makes) of hardware.  You might take the time some day to 
 ML> check out how many of the new files in your newest FixPak 
 ML> replace those same-named files that were updated in a previous 
 ML> FixPak. 
 
The fixpaks are cumulative.  Therefore every file that has been fixed since
fixpak 1 is included in fixpak 12.  
 
 ML> My experience has not been the same as yours.  I have had too 
 ML> many FixPaks that broke programs I had been using for years 
 ML> Not to speak of the high probability of the FixPak writers 
 ML> making poorer design decisions than were made for the "unfixed" 
 ML> original, so their FixPak has to be fixed again with later 
 ML> FixPaks :-(.  For example: Consider the "Y2K fix" in Warp 4 
 
 Surprise!  All of the change team people in IBM work for the same 
 people that developed the original code.  
 
 ML> I am sure that I could find other FixPak misadventures than 
 ML> those I have related here, if I tried very hard. 
 
I'm sure you can!  
 
All I know is that OS/2 release 4 at fixpak 12 is working very well here with 
MY set of applications...  - ray  
 
--- PC-RAIN 1.00  (á6)