Hi Peter, hi all, On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Peter Leese <[email protected]> wrote: > I was supplied the patch by a third party. His reasoning behind doing this > way was that he did not want > a random filename, but a filename that was related to the name used in the > URL. If this failed (i.e > 001-<filename> to 099-<filename> already exists, then fall back to > mkstemp()). This was OK with me so I accepted > the patch.
Peter, thanks for the reply. Release managers, what do you think about that? -- Alessio Treglia <[email protected]> Debian & Ubuntu Developer | Homepage: http://www.alessiotreglia.com 0FEC 59A5 E18E E04F 6D40 593B 45D4 8C7C DCFC 3FD0 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
