Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Lars> What that patch does has nothing to do with gcc 2.7.x as I have
| Lars> used most of the constructs he rewrites/changes on such a
| Lars> system.
|
| So we might try to fix the code in a way that makes it work for
| Andre'. I do not really understand why my posting of this diff (which
| was not intended to be applied, after all) made you so upset.
Probably because I fear that someone will apply this patch to cvs
before I manage to speak up about it...
But I am not that upset. :-) only a bit agitated
Lgb
- Re: Diffs to compile lyx 1.1.x with gcc 2.7.x Anonymous
- Re: Diffs to compile lyx 1.1.x with gcc 2.7.x Anonymous
- Re: Diffs to compile lyx 1.1.x with gcc 2.7.x Anonymous
- Re: Diffs to compile lyx 1.1.x with gcc 2.7.x Anonymous
- Re: Diffs to compile lyx 1.1.x with gcc 2.7.x Anonymous
- Re: Diffs to compile lyx 1.1.x with gcc 2.7.x Anonymous
- Re: Diffs to compile lyx 1.1.x with gcc 2.7.x Anonymous
- Re: Diffs to compile lyx 1.1.x with gcc 2.... Anonymous
- Re: Diffs to compile lyx 1.1.x with gc... Anonymous
- Re: Diffs to compile lyx 1.1.x with gc... Anonymous
- Re: Diffs to compile lyx 1.1.x with gcc 2.7.x Anonymous
- Re: Diffs to compile lyx 1.1.x with gcc 2.7.x Anonymous
