On Mar 8, 2010, at 15:56, Keith Packard wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 09:44:44 +1000, Peter Hutterer <[email protected] > wrote:thanks. I've reverted it on the nominations branch until we've narrowed downwhat the cause of it is.It seems not unlikely that fluxbox is depending on the old ("incorrect")behaviour, leaving us with the choice of shipping code that doesn't conform to the spec or breaking applications.
If fluxbox fixes itself, how bad will the behavior be on older ("incorrect") servers? I'm certainly one for conforming to standards in a tie breaker like this.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ xorg-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
