| 1 |
As the one that got it working, I'm biased... |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
I'd say no to that (unless outvoted of course) on the grounds that a |
| 4 |
manifest change *is* worthy of note. It means that the checksum has |
| 5 |
changed on one of the files listed. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 09:00:14AM +0100, Dhruba Bandopadhyay wrote: |
| 9 |
> Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Thanks. It seems to be working now. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Would it be possible to omit entries that mention only a manifest |
| 14 |
> fixing? It's just that there's so many of them everytime (done by |
| 15 |
> scripts I presume) the email becomes really long. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> With regards. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> -- |
| 21 |
> gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-----o()o--------------------------------------------- |
| 28 |
| http://www.gentoo.org/ |
| 29 |
| #gentoo-dev on irc.freenode.net |
| 30 |
Gentoo Dev | #gentoo-perl on irc.freenode.net |
| 31 |
Perl Guy | |
| 32 |
| GnuPG Key ID: AB5CED4E9E7F4E2E |
| 33 |
-----o()o--------------------------------------------- |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives