In data giovedì 01 aprile 2010 21:13:20, Frank Ch. Eigler ha scritto:
> Or rather, it has gotten stale. I started up update process that
> should, very very slowly, let it catch up with the present day. If
> that completes in reasonable time, maybe I'll keep it running.
Ok, it's been several da
In data giovedì 01 aprile 2010 21:13:20, Frank Ch. Eigler ha scritto:
> > The mercurial mirror of the gcc repository, at
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/hg/gcc has been broken [...]
>
> Or rather, it has gotten stale. I started up update process that
> should, very very slowly, let it catch up with the p
Thomas Capricelli writes:
> The mercurial mirror of the gcc repository, at
> http://gcc.gnu.org/hg/gcc has been broken [...]
Or rather, it has gotten stale. I started up update process that
should, very very slowly, let it catch up with the present day. If
that completes in reasonable time, ma
In data giovedì 01 aprile 2010 16:29:12, Rainer Orth ha scritto:
> works just fine. From my experience, hg is vastly superior to git,
> which is simply a usability nightmare, as Dan Berlin discovered when he
> worked on setting up the hg mirror.
I completely agree, but my point was not to start
Thomas Capricelli writes:
> The mercurial mirror of the gcc repository, at
> http://gcc.gnu.org/hg/gcc has been broken for months. and the
> contact listed there does not answer emails.
>
> Can somebody here at least remove those misleading pages..?
If there is concensus here to remove this
Thomas,
> The mercurial mirror of the gcc repository, at http://gcc.gnu.org/hg/gcc has
> been broken for months. and the contact listed there does not answer
> emails.
unfortunately true, I've asked the same question quite some time ago.
> Can somebody here at least remove those misleading
