On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 05:22:42PM +0100, Hiltjo Posthuma wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 8:00 PM, Lieven Moors wrote:
> > Would it make sense to keep latest out-of-tree patches in a git
> > repo? It's not a lot of work to keep them up to date, but on the other hand
> > I
> > guess many people d
Do you know if there are any binary editors that would allow you to input
Unicode and other code pages in the right hand panel?
XL
> On 2015-11-13, at 23:15, Random832 wrote:
>
> Greg Reagle writes:
>> I agree that it is a "poor man's" hex editor. I am having fun with it, even
>> if
>> it i
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 8:00 PM, Lieven Moors wrote:
> Would it make sense to keep latest out-of-tree patches in a git
> repo? It's not a lot of work to keep them up to date, but on the other hand I
> guess many people do the same thing over and over again.
>
The out-of-tree patches are already i
On Sat, 14 Nov 2015 08:48:33 +0100
pancake wrote:
> No. Not just this. Rtfm... Rm -f is needed if you dont want a prompt to
> remove that file in case of custpm umask or a race condition with another
> script happens.
> > On 14 Nov 2015, at 03:40, Greg Reagle wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Nov 1
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 08:00:36PM +0100, Lieven Moors wrote:
Would it make sense to keep latest out-of-tree patches in a git
repo? It's not a lot of work to keep them up to date, but on the other hand I
guess many people do the same thing over and over again.
Isn't this idea seems similar to
