On Saturday 09 April 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>
> Here is what I've squashed in:
>
> -*-*-
>
> diff --git a/ChangeLog b/ChangeLog
> index 6649603..1bf9ab3 100644
> --- a/ChangeLog
> +++ b/ChangeLog
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -2011-04-06 Stefano Lattarini
> +2011-04-09 Stefano Lattarini
>
On Saturday 09 April 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 06:52:24PM CEST:
> > OK for maint? I'll push in 72 hours if there is no objection.
>
> This is OK with a NEWS entry and the nit below addressed.
>
> Thanks!
> Ralf
>
> > Subject: [PATCH] java:
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 06:52:24PM CEST:
> OK for maint? I'll push in 72 hours if there is no objection.
This is OK with a NEWS entry and the nit below addressed.
Thanks!
Ralf
> Subject: [PATCH] java: check_JAVA does not cause compilation by "make all"
> anymore
> Fi
On 04/06/2011 07:52 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> The attached patch should fix the bug. The exposing testcase passes
> with the modification to automake.in installed, and fails without.
>
> OK for maint? I'll push in 72 hours if there is no objection.
>
My email address seems to have a longe
On Wednesday 06 April 2011, Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 04/06/2011 07:52 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> > The attached patch should fix the bug. The exposing testcase passes
> > with the modification to automake.in installed, and fails without.
> >
> > OK for maint? I'll push in 72 hours if there i
tags 8234 patch
thanks
[adding automake-patches]
Hello Petteri. Thanks for the report, and sorry for the delay.
On Saturday 12 March 2011, Petteri Räty wrote:
> http://sources.redhat.com/automake/automake.html
>
> "The special prefix ‘check_’ indicates that the objects in question
> should not
