On 17.03.2016 14:44, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 16.03.2016 um 19:54 hat Max Reitz geschrieben:
>> This series appears to reinvent itself with every revision. This time,
>> its main implication is that BBs are no longer automatically treated as
>> monitor-owned, and that a BB's name is tightly tied to t
Am 16.03.2016 um 19:54 hat Max Reitz geschrieben:
> This series appears to reinvent itself with every revision. This time,
> its main implication is that BBs are no longer automatically treated as
> monitor-owned, and that a BB's name is tightly tied to the monitor
> reference (it is considered equ
This series appears to reinvent itself with every revision. This time,
its main implication is that BBs are no longer automatically treated as
monitor-owned, and that a BB's name is tightly tied to the monitor
reference (it is considered equivalent to that reference).
v4:
- Tightly tied a BB's na
