Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642208
Erik van Pienbroek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642208
--- Comment #18 from Jon Ciesla 2011-07-03 08:54:51 EDT ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).
--
Configure bugmail: https://
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642208
Erik van Pienbroek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642208
--- Comment #16 from Kalev Lember 2011-07-03 06:19:35
EDT ---
Looks good.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/u
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642208
--- Comment #15 from Erik van Pienbroek
2011-07-03 06:11:49 EDT ---
Spec URL: http://ftd4linux.nl/contrib/mingw-win-iconv.spec
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642208
--- Comment #14 from Levente Farkas 2011-06-22 15:37:34
EDT ---
please add the cmake version br too.
--
Configure bugmail: ht
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642208
--- Comment #13 from Erik van Pienbroek
2011-06-03 09:01:16 EDT ---
The big difference between GNU libiconv and win-iconv is th
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642208
Levente Farkas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642208
--- Comment #10 from Erik van Pienbroek
2011-06-02 16:17:59 EDT ---
Good spotting there! Thanks for taking another look at the
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642208
--- Comment #11 from Erik van Pienbroek
2011-06-02 16:18:51 EDT ---
The SRPM URL should have been
http://ftd4linux.nl/contrib/m
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642208
--- Comment #9 from Kalev Lember 2011-06-02 15:53:22 EDT
---
One blocker:
- Obsoletes and Provides should defined for the bina
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642208
Erik van Pienbroek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642208
--- Comment #8 from Erik van Pienbroek 2011-06-02
10:49:30 EDT ---
Small typo, the spec url can be found at
http://ftd4linux.nl
13 matches
Mail list logo
