On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 11:53 +0200, Tilman Sauerbeck wrote:
Mark Rosenstand [2007-05-12 03:16]:
My local copy of git://crux.nu/system/iso.git is very outdated and only
has a master branch (at 2.1), while
http://crux.nu/gitweb/?p=system/iso.git;a=summary seems to have a 2.3
branch and a lot
On Sun, May 13, 2007 at 04:12:41PM +0200, Mark Rosenstand wrote:
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 11:53 +0200, Tilman Sauerbeck wrote:
Mark Rosenstand [2007-05-12 03:16]:
My local copy of git://crux.nu/system/iso.git is very outdated and only
has a master branch (at 2.1), while
Mark Rosenstand [2007-05-12 03:16]:
My local copy of git://crux.nu/system/iso.git is very outdated and only
has a master branch (at 2.1), while
http://crux.nu/gitweb/?p=system/iso.git;a=summary seems to have a 2.3
branch and a lot of activity. Is the gitweb page showing a different
My local copy of git://crux.nu/system/iso.git is very outdated and only
has a master branch (at 2.1), while
http://crux.nu/gitweb/?p=system/iso.git;a=summary seems to have a 2.3
branch and a lot of activity. Is the gitweb page showing a different
repository?
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 03:16 +0200, Mark Rosenstand wrote:
My local copy of git://crux.nu/system/iso.git is very outdated and only
has a master branch (at 2.1), while
http://crux.nu/gitweb/?p=system/iso.git;a=summary seems to have a 2.3
branch and a lot of activity. Is the gitweb page showing a
