> BTW, if anyone's interested, I could post my accels.txt file, rather than
> others having to duplicate all my work, and all the time I spent
> (literally hours) coming up with a workable scheme. To this point, I've
> always supposed no one would be interested, but after explaining the
> above, p
"Mick Semb Wever" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Wed, 16 Aug 2006 18:57:22
+:
> It's been a while but I've subscribed again to the Pan users list, but
> don't worry i've been a faithful pan user in the background all this time
> It took the recent improvemen
GISQUET Christophe said
> I've just subscribed to this mailing list and can't reply to the 0.108
> thread, therefore I'm starting a new thread on the win32 topic.
>
> Since 0.14.2.90+, I've been able to build win32 versions of pan, but
> only since 0.9x have they been really usable. Recently I tr
It's been a while but I've subscribed again to the Pan users list, but
don't worry i've been a faithful pan user in the background all this time
It took the recent improvements/rewrite to get my attention back to the
community, and it's been well worth it after reading just a few of
Duncan's posts
Yavor Doganov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Wed, 16
Aug 2006 13:38:00 +0300:
> On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 14:47:07 +, Duncan wrote:
>
>>> You certainly mean GNU/Linux here, not the Linux kernel. Besides this
>>> your explanation is good, thanks.
>>
>> But simpl
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 14:47:07 +, Duncan wrote:
>> You certainly mean GNU/Linux here, not the Linux kernel. Besides this
>> your explanation is good, thanks.
>
> But simply "Linux" in the common parlance.
That "common parlance" is harmful for the Free Software Movement and
we're willing to
