Greg Schafer wrote:
> Matthew Burgess wrote:
>
>
>>As regards to LFS unstable living up to its name, that's probably
>>because we chose the right name for it, i.e. we don't try and pretend
>>that it's something it isn't. I don't see why you thought a :-( was
>>necessary. Yes, testing could h
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> As regards to LFS unstable living up to its name, that's probably
> because we chose the right name for it, i.e. we don't try and pretend
> that it's something it isn't. I don't see why you thought a :-( was
> necessary. Yes, testing could have been more thorough, but
On 2/23/06, Tushar Teredesai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/23/06, Greg Schafer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Sigh.. even tho' jhalfs provides the facility to prevent this kind of
> > damage, LFS unstable is still living up to its name :-(
>
> Isn't that the point of having a revision control s
On 2/23/06, Greg Schafer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sigh.. even tho' jhalfs provides the facility to prevent this kind of
> damage, LFS unstable is still living up to its name :-(
Isn't that the point of having a revision control system and an unstable branch?
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMA
Greg Schafer wrote:
matthew wrote:
Author: matthew
Date: 2006-02-21 13:50:22 -0700 (Tue, 21 Feb 2006)
New Revision: 7392
Modified:
trunk/BOOK/chapter01/changelog.xml
trunk/BOOK/chapter03/patches.xml
trunk/BOOK/patches.ent
Log:
Add Bash patches 009 and 010 from upstream
Matt, patch 01
matthew wrote:
> Author: matthew
> Date: 2006-02-21 13:50:22 -0700 (Tue, 21 Feb 2006)
> New Revision: 7392
>
> Modified:
>trunk/BOOK/chapter01/changelog.xml
>trunk/BOOK/chapter03/patches.xml
>trunk/BOOK/patches.ent
> Log:
> Add Bash patches 009 and 010 from upstream
Matt, patch 010 b
