On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <
asmo...@in-nomine.org> wrote:
> -On [20090408 05:24], Tennessee Leeuwenburg (tleeuwenb...@gmail.com)
> wrote:
> >It seems like the bug relates only to an older version of a 'weird'
> >operating system and could perhaps be left unfixe
-On [20090408 05:24], Tennessee Leeuwenburg (tleeuwenb...@gmail.com) wrote:
>It seems like the bug relates only to an older version of a 'weird'
>operating system and could perhaps be left unfixed without causing
>anyone any problems.
Being one of the FreeBSD guys I'll throw peanuts at you. :P
I
Tennessee Leeuwenburg writes:
> I'd agree with that. I just wonder whether it's necessary to create another
> issue, or whether the issue can be marked as 'fixed' without opening the new
> issue.
Opening a new issue has the effect of running a poll of those who
watch such issues on the tracker
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 1:14 PM, Guilherme Polo wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 11:54 PM, Tennessee Leeuwenburg
> wrote:
> > This issue has been largely resolved, but there is an outstanding bug
> where
> > the (reviewed and committed) solution does not work on certain versions
> of
> > FreeBSD (
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 11:54 PM, Tennessee Leeuwenburg
wrote:
> This issue has been largely resolved, but there is an outstanding bug where
> the (reviewed and committed) solution does not work on certain versions of
> FreeBSD (broken in 6.3, working in 7+). Do we have a list of 'supported
> platf
This issue has been largely resolved, but there is an outstanding bug where
the (reviewed and committed) solution does not work on certain versions of
FreeBSD (broken in 6.3, working in 7+). Do we have a list of 'supported
platforms', and is FreeBSD 6.3 in it?
What's the policy with regards to sup
