On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 18:32, Bastien Nocera wrote: > 0.99.8 should work fine as well. There's currently 0.99.10 in Fedora, as > the 0.99.11 suffered from libsmbclient's youth at the time of release. > The current CVS HEAD version should work much better, but that's for > GNOME 2.6.
Is 0.99.12 the 2.6-headed version? > BTW, filing bugs and sending an e-mail 10 minutes afterwards complaining > of having not received a response is a bit droll. I filed 119172 on August 5, 2003 and received some response on October 30 of the same year. That's what I mean when I say unresponsive. > About being unresponsive, I also have other things I'm working on, and I > only have so much time for hacking on Free Software. Still, I can only > see 9 bugs opened in bugzilla.gnome.org and only a few of them could be > labelled as show-stoppers. Such as 119172. Still, I'm not upset at you for not fixing it, but when I filed 119172 the state of the bugs list was horrific. Nothing was ever fixed or even maintained in bugzilla. Now it looks like that's changing, which is good. > I'd really rather see patches and test cases than what looks like > uninformed e-mails like this one. Sigh. -- Joe Drew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Just admit to yourself that you're a thief: http://me.woot.net/stealing.html
