Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 01/20/07 11:28 CST: > I know. I didn't want to either, but I thought there was a security > issue in 0.94.1. Looking again, I can't find it. Lets hold off > reverting this for a few days and see if the mozdev folks release a > better tarball. I can then use that or revert to 0.94.1 if they don't.
Yes, of course. I meant to specify that in my last mail, but it didn't get typed in. What I meant to say was (now that my head is clear from coming in at 3:30 in the morning last night): Let's ensure a stable tarball of Enigmail is released soon, or (what I said) Can we leave the SeaMonkey ticket open as a reminder that this is still an outstanding issue? > e.g. avoid ..file file. I suppose I could change it to: > > Now clean up one <filename>Makefile</filename> to ... After relooking at it, I'm wondering why you didn't just put the sed instruction in the main area right before the 'make' command, and then just use a "command explanation" blurb to explain (and the 'make' command/application tag is just a minor nitpick). Also, the Enigmail tarball cannot be downloaded right now (Justin?) nor could I fetch the .mozconfig file from Anduin. -- Randy rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.26] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3 i686] 11:38:01 up 10 days, 11:52, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-book FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
