The e-mail received is to an invalid e-mail address due to violations to this
e-mail address, it has been removed. If you are sending e-mail to [EMAIL
PROTECTED] it is due to internet hackers or an old listing of reference that is
no longer valid.
If you are interested in contacting Rosebud's
Have you wanted a pricey watch or piece of fine Jewerly?
We have the answer for you!
We stock all the big names for a low fraction of the cost.
www.dejannu.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 13:42:03 -0700, Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > Regardless, even requiring debian/rules to be a makefile doesn't
> > actually do much, because someone could do something like:
>
> > .DEFAULT:
> > debian/irule $@
W dniu 18 lipca jestem poza biurem. W sprawach pilnych proszê o kontakt
telefoniczny.
Pozdrawiam
Magda Dudanowicz
Tel. 694 473 650
On July 18 I will be out of office. In urgent cases, please call my mobile.
Best regards
Magda Dudanowicz
(+48 694 473 650)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
Your message for list noempire has been forwarded to editor(s)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 13:42:03 -0700, Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Regardless, even requiring debian/rules to be a makefile doesn't
> actually do much, because someone could do something like:
> .DEFAULT:
> debian/irule $@
> or whatever.
I actually see this as a argu
Please remember to send discussion of Policy proposals to the relevant bug
instead of only to the debian-policy list. Discussion not sent to the bug
is much harder to track down later when one tries to figure out the
history of a Policy change.
Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Gunnar
Gunnar Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Otavio Salvador dijo [Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 05:53:56PM -0300]:
>> >> There is no technical reason why this has to be a makefile. I propose:
>> >
>> > What is the use case of the change? I already see enough "bad code"
>> > right now, and it would only get
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Hi folks,
This proposal is based on part of a talk I gave at debconf7, and
is about reorganizing the policy document(s). The current policy
document grew organically from the dpkg documentation, and the
packaging manual, and has grown bloated, and contains mate
Otavio Salvador dijo [Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 05:53:56PM -0300]:
> >> There is no technical reason why this has to be a makefile. I propose:
> >
> > What is the use case of the change? I already see enough "bad code"
> > right now, and it would only get worse if people start to write their
> > make f
Please note that
Jenny Hulett is no longer with the agency. Please direct all future e-mails to
Annie Durrough ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). Thank you.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
please call 808.676.5877
SensuallyCertified.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
14 matches
Mail list logo
