| 1 |
Fabian Groffen schrieb: |
| 2 |
> On 16-01-2009 15:09:21 +0100, Markus Duft wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>>>> Please speak up, if you _don't_ want me to do this as a portage patch |
| 5 |
>>>> |
| 6 |
>>> in the |
| 7 |
>>> |
| 8 |
>>>> prefix tree. That's what I want to do, if nobody has a problem with |
| 9 |
>>>> |
| 10 |
>>> it ;) |
| 11 |
>>> |
| 12 |
>>> Please don't. |
| 13 |
>>> |
| 14 |
>> Ok, so what else then? |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Ignore my previous comment. Don't patch Portage. I see no problems in |
| 18 |
> applying it for every arch. So just get a patch on my desk so I can |
| 19 |
> commit it in Prefix Portage's sources. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
Am I only getting some hundreds of mails? |
Archives