[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Are pristine trees really dead?
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Are pristine trees really dead? |
Date: |
Sun, 21 Dec 2003 19:15:42 -0800 (PST) |
> From: Miles Bader <address@hidden>
> Miles Bader <address@hidden> writes:
> > ... but now I notice that _without_ --link or --library, tla get will
> > indeed still create a pristine tree, even if you have a greedy library
> > (I'm not sure why I thought differently before!).
> > Tom, what do you think of the following patch, to basically use
> > --library by default if there's a greedy library?
> Hmmm, no comments, so if anyone cares to merge:
> address@hidden/tla--devo--1.2--base-0
> tag of address@hidden/tla--devo--1.2--base-0
> address@hidden/tla--devo--1.2--patch-1
> If there's a greedy library, make get use it instead of making a
pristine
Sorry -- after you raised the question but before you posted the patch
I mentioned that such a change would be fine for 1.2.
It'll still wait till after the gpg stuff, though (just a few more
days).
-t
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, (continued)
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Tom Lord, 2003/12/17
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Pau Aliagas, 2003/12/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, James Blackwell, 2003/12/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Tom Lord, 2003/12/17
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Miles Bader, 2003/12/19
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Are pristine trees really dead?, Miles Bader, 2003/12/21
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Are pristine trees really dead?,
Tom Lord <=