hello,
On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 07:22:28PM +0200, Sven Neumann wrote:
> Carol Spears <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > i was trying to restate the following quote from a previous email in
> > this thread:
> > 
> > "That's the reason that gimp-2.1 cannot be installed into the same
> > prefix as gimp-2.0. It's supposed to replace it. Currently there's the
> > temporary condition that gimp-2.1 installs quite some things into
> > directories versioned as 2.1. This is supposed to be changed back to 2.0
> > when gimp-2.2 is ready."
> > 
> > restate it and suggest a quicker fix like a few others i have seen.
> > 
> > this quote i pasted is not about a naming problem?
> 
> No, it isn't, there is no naming problem. Everything including the
> "temporay condition" is completely intentional.
> 
okay, i thought that the job of not actually answering questions was
given to dave neary, but i have been wrong before.

first of all, temporay or temporary  and second of all, you just said
that you did not answer my question here.

my question was about the logic which lead to this condition of this gimp
and its ability to install different versions, side by side.  like the
good old days.

carol

_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Reply via email to