On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 03:39:10PM +0200, Marc Lehmann wrote:
> I fully trust you, then. I'd still sugegst to fix the description then, as it
> is simply misleading. It's better not to describe the fix at all than to
> describe it wrongly.
There's a reference to this bug report in the message, so
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 12:31:52AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 12:10:43PM +0200, Marc Lehmann wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 12:53:38AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL
> > PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I think I clearly documented the bug in ncur
On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 12:10:43PM +0200, Marc Lehmann wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 12:53:38AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have to agree with Thomas on one thing - jed doesn't use libncurses,
> > even in Debian.
>
>ldd /usr/bin/jed
>libncurses.s
On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 12:53:38AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I have to agree with Thomas on one thing - jed doesn't use libncurses,
> even in Debian.
ldd /usr/bin/jed
libncurses.so.5 => /usr/lib/libncurses.so.5 (0x2b40e000)
(this is on my amd64 m
I've read over the log of this bug report as part of an updated ncurses
package that I'm preparing. My impression is that some changes were
made to ncurses, but they didn't fix Marc's problem with jed.
I have to agree with Thomas on one thing - jed doesn't use libncurses,
even in Debian. At that
5 matches
Mail list logo
