On Mon, 10 May 2004, Lombard, David N wrote:
> > more than 8 seconds, but I'm guessing it will be <<8*N, where N is the
> > number of RPMs to check.
>
> Actually, I don't understand why update-rpms isn't presented with one
> big list. I noted that and the commensurate time reduction in my
> earlier "CVS fixes" email -- perhaps you need to remove me from your
> kill file ;^)
:-)
I saw your prior e-mail but it wasn't clear to me from your language that
this was possible -- it was implied, but I figured I'd ask directly so
that we were on the same sheet of music.
This is a DM issue, then -- I'll try to get to it later this week (have
some papers due tonight).
--
{+} Jeff Squyres
{+} [EMAIL PROTECTED]
{+} http://www.lam-mpi.org/
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by Sleepycat Software
Learn developer strategies Cisco, Motorola, Ericsson & Lucent use to deliver
higher performing products faster, at low TCO.
http://www.sleepycat.com/telcomwpreg.php?From=osdnemail3
_______________________________________________
Oscar-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oscar-devel
