Yes and it's getting harder and harder to update a cvs a tree with less than 15 'update aborted' (soon a "while true do cvs update done" will be needed to get a chance... and this would just harass SF servers more).
I was wondering... Wouldn't it be better to switch to savannah? It has the same system as SF but isn't as overloaded. I think licq complies with savannah prerequisites for a project (well this could be checked). Anyway, to talk about new release, I don't get any more segfaults as I reported before (looked like some kind of race condition when both "new user" and "away message reading" blinkings were active. Thanks to DimaK for this! Looks like too the problem of licq segfaulting when it had finished receiving a file is solved, but I have not tried yet. Le Thu, 19 Jun 2003 08:52:31 +0700 Alexander Litvinov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit: > Anon cvs on SF is about 24-48 hours late comparing to developer cvs. > SF is overloadeed and going down. > > On _____, 18 ____ 2003 23:30, Jon Keating wrote: > > Hello, > > > > As some of you have pointed out the CVS copy of Licq does not > > compile. Yesterday I commited the fixes for that, and it shows up > > when I run a 'cvs log'. So, as Juan requested, I cannot make a > > diff, since it is saying I am up to date. I looked at the web > > interface of the CVS, and it does not show my last commit. I will > > e-mail SF support about this problem. > > > > Jon -- Voyageur
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
