[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> does rex = rexx (script language found in OS/2 amongst others)
As others have pointed out, no. But REXX == Regina, a package in
to-be-2.0.
--
Carey Evans http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/c.evans/
GNU GPL: "The Source will be with you... always."
On Tue, 20 Jan 1998 08:49:32, [EMAIL PROTECTED] asked:
> does rex = rexx (script language found in OS/2 amongst others)
No.
> What are hamm and bo?
They are code names for versions. Debian normally has two (three
for a brief period after the release of a new version) distributions
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Tue, 20 Jan 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Fairly newcomer to Linux here, so hope you (or anyone else) wouldn't mind
> answering a couple of basic questions for me:
Nothing to be ashamed! I'm a newcomer, too.
> does rex = rexx (script language found in O
Addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert D. Hilliard)
debian-user@lists.debian.org
** Reply to note from [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert D. Hilliard) Fri, 16 Jan 1998
22:03:55 -0500 (EST)
>
> I believe it is desirable for debian to provide a painless
> upgrade route from rex to ham
On Tue, 20 Jan 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert D. Hilliard)
> debian-user@lists.debian.org
>
> ** Reply to note from [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert D. Hilliard) Fri, 16 Jan 1998
> 22:03:55 -0500 (EST)
> >
> > I believe it is desirable for
On Sun, 18 Jan 1998, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > > buzz, too, anyone?
> > is anyone still running buzz?
>
> Actually, I was a bit surprised that so many people are still running
> rexx, or at least that so much work is going into it.
rex was our first really good release. lots of people are into "
On Sat, 17 Jan 1998, Robert D. Hilliard wrote:
> > on a more general note, i think it would be better for my version and
> > your rex version to be merged into one script.
>
> At first I thought this wasn't very practical, since the rex update
> is messier than the bo update. I now think it wou
On Sun, Jan 18, 1998 at 10:56:31AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jan 1998, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 17, 1998 at 02:30:37PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > > i released v0.11 of the script a few hours ago, so you'll probably
> > > want to update your rex version to that.
> >
On Sat, 17 Jan 1998, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 17, 1998 at 02:30:37PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > i released v0.11 of the script a few hours ago, so you'll probably
> > want to update your rex version to that.
>
> buzz, too, anyone?
is anyone still running buzz?
(it would be good t
On Sat, 17 Jan 1998 14:30:37 +1100 (EST) you wrote:
> i released v0.11 of the script a few hours ago, so you'll probably want to
> update your rex version to that.
Agreed. I received it 5 minutes after I sent my message!
> on a more general note, i think it would be better for my version
On Sat, Jan 17, 1998 at 02:30:37PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> i released v0.11 of the script a few hours ago, so you'll probably want to
> update your rex version to that.
buzz, too, anyone?
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Debian pack
i released v0.11 of the script a few hours ago, so you'll probably want to
update your rex version to that.
on a more general note, i think it would be better for my version and
your rex version to be merged into one script. you could perform some
test near the top of the script and set a REX=0
I believe it is desirable for debian to provide a painless
upgrade route from rex to hamm, without first upgrading to bo. Last
month I experimented with a manual upgrade of a rex filesysem to hamm,
following Scott Ellis's Mini-HOWTO. There were problems (see my
testing report of 12/18/97), b
13 matches
Mail list logo
