Re: gimp segfault within script-fu

1999-11-02 Thread Kevin Dalley
Ingo Reimann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thanks for that hint, but i have been using the unstable releases of gimp > from the beginning on. Unstable and unusable is something quite different, > don't you agree? Unstable suggests that it is in danger of being unusable at any time. When it becom

Re: gimp segfault within script-fu

1999-11-01 Thread Martin Fluch
On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Ingo Reimann wrote: > Thanks for that hint, but i have been using the unstable releases of gimp > from the beginning on. Unstable and unusable is something quite different, > don't you agree? Yes, of course ... im using the "unstable" potato right now, and i know that ... nev

Re: gimp segfault within script-fu

1999-11-01 Thread Ingo Reimann
On Mon, Nov 01, 1999 at 03:28:02PM +0200, Martin Fluch wrote: > On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Ingo Reimann wrote: > > > does anyone know, what happened with lovely gimp? > > > > Just now, it is not useable, due to segfaults in script-fu. Bugreport has > > been submitted (#48840) > > > > I need it... > >

Re: gimp segfault within script-fu

1999-11-01 Thread Martin Fluch
On Mon, 1 Nov 1999, Ingo Reimann wrote: > does anyone know, what happened with lovely gimp? > > Just now, it is not useable, due to segfaults in script-fu. Bugreport has > been submitted (#48840) > > I need it... There is the same scheme for version numbering with gimp than with the kernel. If

gimp segfault within script-fu

1999-11-01 Thread Ingo Reimann
Hi does anyone know, what happened with lovely gimp? Just now, it is not useable, due to segfaults in script-fu. Bugreport has been submitted (#48840) I need it... Ingo I. Reimann [EMAIL PROTECTED]