>>>>> "Baruch" == Baruch Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

Baruch> Nope he didn't. I've fixed it on my tree and now doing a
Baruch> compilation. The mistake is a wrong resolution of conflicts
Baruch> after your changes with relation to the display/screen stuff.
Baruch> I've resolved it here locally as it should be, and will create
Baruch> and post a patch soon enough.

Hmm, so this means we should not rely too much on cvs when it merges
conflicting changes?

JMarc

Reply via email to