[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15]
From: |
Josip Rodin |
Subject: |
Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15] |
Date: |
Tue, 2 Jul 2002 12:49:58 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4i |
On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 12:27:32PM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> AAARG! How is anyone (being a humble configure script) supposed to
> pick `3.1.1<SPACE>20020606' to be the version string from that?
Why do you need the date, anyway? Just "3.1.1" should be enough, Debian
releases aren't meant to randomly break compatibility with the same version
and different dates.
--
2. That which causes joy or happiness.
- lily 1.4.15, Peter Chubb, 2002/07/01
- Re: lily 1.4.15, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2002/07/02
- Re: lily 1.4.15, Peter Chubb, 2002/07/02
- Re: lily 1.4.15, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2002/07/02
- Message not available
- Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2002/07/02
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15],
Josip Rodin <=
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2002/07/02
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Josip Rodin, 2002/07/02
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2002/07/02
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Wichert Akkerman, 2002/07/02
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2002/07/02
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2002/07/02
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Wichert Akkerman, 2002/07/02
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2002/07/02
- Re: Unparsable gcc version string? [WAS: lily 1.4.15], Jochen Voss, 2002/07/02
Re: lily 1.4.15, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2002/07/02