Dear List.
my, that's good to have sorted. The prospect of
having to
start crond in my init scripts was truly frightening.
Thanks, all!
Bernard Leak
--
Still fighting the good fight. Fights are good when I win them.
On 29 May 2006 15:18, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Sun, 28 May 2006, Dave Korn wrote:
>> Rightyho, I just inferred the date from the timestamps on the FTP server;
>> I've used 6th march in the announce message. However from where I'm
>> sitting the gcc.gnu.org front page still says March 10th - ca
On Sun, 28 May 2006, Dave Korn wrote:
> Rightyho, I just inferred the date from the timestamps on the FTP server;
> I've used 6th march in the announce message. However from where I'm sitting
> the gcc.gnu.org front page still says March 10th - can you give it a tweak?
Done. (I was going to cha
On 27 May 2006 21:34, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>
> I just applied the following two patches, to complete things and sync
> on one date for the release on all pages -- March 6th.
Rightyho, I just inferred the date from the timestamps on the FTP server;
I've used 6th march in the announce message.
On Fri, 26 May 2006, Dave Korn wrote:
> Guess he must have been[*], it really only needed a few minutes to fix.
> Suppose we could all demand Gaby be removed from RMship of the closed
> extinct and dead as a dodo 3.4 series but what would be the point?
>
> Anyway, how does this look to everyone?
> Anyway, how does this look to everyone?
FWIW fine with me. Thanks for taking care of this!
--
Eric Botcazou
On 26 May 2006 12:16, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> Dave,
>
> don't forget to send a mail to gcc-announce. No announce has been sent yet:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-announce/2006/
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-announce/2005/
>
> Cheers,
> Manuel.
Don't know if I have the authority to do that
Dave,
don't forget to send a mail to gcc-announce. No announce has been sent yet:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-announce/2006/
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-announce/2005/
Cheers,
Manuel.
On 26/05/06, Dave Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 26 May 2006 11:10, Bernard Leak wrote:
> Dear List,
>
On 26 May 2006 11:10, Bernard Leak wrote:
> Dear List,
> do you all remember this?
>
> Look back to http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-03/msg00759.html
> if your memory needs to be jogged.
>
> two months and a few hours on... has anything changed? Is
> Gabriel Dos Reis still looking int
On 28 April 2006 17:45, Bernard Leak wrote:
> Dear List,
>
> Dave Korn wrote
>> Well, at least the front page of gcc.gnu.org is now self-contradictory:
>>
>> " Previous release series: GCC 3.4.5 (released 2005-11-30)
>> Branch status: GCC 3.4.6 is the last release from the 3.4 series; the
Dear List,
Dave Korn wrote
Well, at least the front page of gcc.gnu.org is now self-contradictory:
" Previous release series: GCC 3.4.5 (released 2005-11-30)
Branch status: GCC 3.4.6 is the last release from the 3.4 series; the
branch has been closed after the release. "
Not unless "
On 27 April 2006 20:33, Bernard Leak wrote:
> Dear List,
> do you all remember this?
>
> Look back to http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-03/msg00759.html
> if your memory needs to be jogged.
>
> One month and a few hours on... has anything changed?
Well, at least the front page of g
> It's turned out to be a somewhat staggered release...
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-03/msg00058.html
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-03/msg00169.html
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-03/msg00374.html
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-03/msg00376.html
>
> Circumstances beyond co
On 27 March 2006 15:06, Bernard Leak wrote:
> Dear List,
> the release announcements for the 3.4 series seem
> to be in trouble. Maybe I'm missing something subtle, but I
> think that the latest release is 3.4.6 (just out, the very latest
> GCC release as I write, on 2006/03/10)
14 matches
Mail list logo
