| 1 |
yeah, i hit send, then jforman hit send. sorry. |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On Tuesday 17 May 2005 12:42 pm, Michael Cummings wrote: |
| 5 |
> (fearing the jeff wrath) |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> can we get the dup status added back in though? i know, i know, we're being |
| 8 |
> nitpicky, and not too many folks have stood up and applauded this effort |
| 9 |
> like they should have (ahem). Just...unsettling to see bugs marked as |
| 10 |
> resolved - make it sound like i did something rather than find that the |
| 11 |
> same problem had been reported a few times :) |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> On Tuesday 17 May 2005 11:47 am, Jeffrey Forman wrote: |
| 14 |
> > Bingo, I found the correlation between those bugs and the previous ones |
| 15 |
> > mentioned by Daniel. They have all been marked as duplicates of other |
| 16 |
> > bugs. Therefore bugzilla does not put a "resolution" in there, only |
| 17 |
> > marking them as status: resolved. |
| 18 |
> > |
| 19 |
> > -Jeffrey |
| 20 |
> > |
| 21 |
> > On Tue, 2005-05-17 at 11:19 -0400, Aaron Walker wrote: |
| 22 |
> > > Jeffrey Forman wrote: |
| 23 |
> > > > That seems odd, then again, those are VERY old bugs. Way before my |
| 24 |
> > > > time of looking at bugzilla to upgrade. |
| 25 |
> > > |
| 26 |
> > > Don't think it has anything to do with age. Just marked this one a dup |
| 27 |
> > > this morning. |
| 28 |
> > > |
| 29 |
> > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92539 |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-----o()o--------------------------------------------- |
| 34 |
Michael Cummings | #gentoo-dev, #gentoo-perl |
| 35 |
Gentoo Perl Dev | on irc.freenode.net |
| 36 |
-----o()o--------------------------------------------- |
Archives