On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 09:06:32AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> >> >> | So am I right in assuming that the whole make machinery is responsible
> >> >> | for the additional 100s?
> [...]
> | question. It's basically the same we would get from a "flat"
> | make within mathed, isn't it?
>
> Ye
On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 03:22:29AM +0100, John Levon wrote:
> > Please remind me of this incident next time a Brit accuses a German of
> > having no sense of humour.
>
> Does it have to be the same Brit?
I openly discriminate only once a minute or so...
Andre'
On Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 04:16:09PM +0100, Jose' Matos wrote:
> > "Other issues"...I understand - did you enjoy german beer? :D
>
> Well, I'm the last person to ask that as the other developpers
> will tell you. ;-) But yes, it is ok. :-)
Well, actually I must confess that José needs a bit of
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 08:33:13AM -0400, Kuba Ober wrote:
>> > | So am I right in assuming that the whole make machinery is
>> > | responsible for the additional 100s?
>> >
>> > Dependency tracking and suck can take some time I guess.
>>
>> Recursive m
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 04:57:09PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> Kuba Ober <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> >> | So am I right in assuming that the whole make machinery is responsible
>> >> | for the additional 100s?
>> >>
>> >> Dependency track
