Le 08/06/2015 16:50, Fernando de Oliveira a écrit : > On 08-06-2015 11:17, Pierre Labastie wrote: >> Le 08/06/2015 15:28, Fernando de Oliveira a écrit : > > >>> I think Pierre is right, but still, shouldn't we also "unrecommend" >>> openssl or remove it from the page, or state that it breaks wget? >>> >> I agree, although the problem with such statements is that they remain >> even when things are fixed. I do not know for you, but I usually do not >> test things which are supposed to be broken... >> >> Maybe a statement like "the combination wget-1.16.3—openssl-1.0.2 >> is broken" (not using "&version" entities). > > Yes, good idea! > > Please, would you mind doing that at night, when fixing or not ant? So, > there would be the advantage that more people would have the opportunity > to comment, if they wish. >
Done at r16095. Pierre -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
