https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364321
Nate Graham changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on|453853 |
See Also||
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364321
Nate Graham changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on|453854 |
See Also||
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364321
--- Comment #27 from Nate Graham ---
This is what happens to hidden options: the feature they controls bit-rots
because it's not being regularly tested. The fact that this is happening is a
strong argument to me in favor of exposing it in the UI so more
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364321
--- Comment #26 from Erik Quaeghebeur ---
(In reply to vmelkon from comment #25)
> I would much prefer to have a bug free implementation rather than an Option
> in the UI.
Bug 57240's last comment mentioned that apps that do not respect
BinaryUnitDiale
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364321
Erik Quaeghebeur changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||453854
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugs.kde.o
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364321
Erik Quaeghebeur changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||453853
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugs.kde.o
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364321
--- Comment #25 from vmel...@yahoo.com ---
I would much prefer to have a bug free implementation rather than an Option in
the UI.
In fact, this is the first time I have heard that KDE has a solution for this.
Thanks Ahmad Samir for linking to 57240.
I ha
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364321
Nate Graham changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://bugs.kde.org/show_b
|
