John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 09:06:26AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
|
| > Are we using pspell or aspell?
| >
| > If pspell is just a compability wrapper why are we using it?
|
| I've already explained this. It's so things work with the original
| libpsp
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 09:06:26AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
> Are we using pspell or aspell?
>
> If pspell is just a compability wrapper why are we using it?
I've already explained this. It's so things work with the original
libpspell AND the new libaspell (the latter via libpspell comp
"Garst R. Reese" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On current aspell-0.50.3 new-pspell-config has been replaced by
| new-aspell-config.
Are we using pspell or aspell?
If pspell is just a compability wrapper why are we using it?
| Although pspell.h defines to two to be equivalent, the current pspell
