Why this is even being discussed: A quote from http://haikuware.com/forum/alpha-3-compatible-software/1955-haiku-alpha3-compatible-software-discussion/Page-4 [quote] Secondly, Haiku releases two different versions. GCC2 & GCC4 (well actually four), yet the 'official' flavour is the GCC2 Hybrid. Confused? So, whose fault is it that developers develop GCC4 apps that don't work on the official hybrid but work on the GCC4 builds? Well, that's interesting. On one hand you could say the developer, on the other hand you could say Haiku because if Haiku only had one official version of their operating system, there wouldn't be this mess in the first place... If they release different versions of their operating system (and I'm not talking architectures), they themselves should ensure that GCC2 software will work on GCC4 builds, and visa versa. To me it's a mess. You don't see this problem with Windows or OS X software. You download it, and it works. There may be a problem with x software only running on WinXP, or OS X 10.5.3, but you don't have to have knowledge of which package/zip file you have to download and which Haiku OS the software will run on. [/quote] The haiku devs are partly to blame and should take a roll in corecting the issue. It is the reputation of the Haiku project that is at stake, not these game porters who are just doing what they want and sharing what they do. When r1a3 or r1beta, or R1 are released and the reviewers attempt to install poorly ported software that is only packaged to run on a gcc4 build of haiku, it will be Haiku that is dissed in the review, not the game that was not packaged to be compatible with Haiku.