Re: sa 3.2.1 FH_DATE_PAST_20XX

2010-01-15 Thread Benny Pedersen
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=301125 hope it gets resolved now, point for me is that 3.2.5 is only marked unstable in gentoo, and i tryed to make another server with just stable ebuilds to see where remaining problems is -- xpoint http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html

Re: sa 3.2.1 FH_DATE_PAST_20XX

2010-01-15 Thread Mark Martinec
since 3.2.1 is still stable in gentoo portage [...] 3.2.5 is only marked unstable in gentoo old - historical - rotten - decaying - stable

sa 3.2.1 FH_DATE_PAST_20XX

2010-01-14 Thread Benny Pedersen
since 3.2.1 is still stable in gentoo portage would make sense to update rules on this for that bug ? -- xpoint

Re: sa 3.2.1 FH_DATE_PAST_20XX

2010-01-14 Thread Matt Kettler
On 1/14/2010 8:55 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote: since 3.2.1 is still stable in gentoo portage would make sense to update rules on this for that bug ? Since, and 3.2.5 was released in June of 2008, and it's currently January of 2010, wouldn't it make sense for gentoo to either: 1) abandon the