Re: Bug#438179: RFC3484 rule 9 active again in glibc 2.7-5.
On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 07:41:23PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > I'm confused. Was this intentional? There was something resembling a race condition between the reversion of the patch and the upload of 2.7-4. One could say that the change in 2.7-4 was unintentional. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#438179: RFC3484 rule 9 active again in glibc 2.7-5.
* Kurt Roeckx: > For those that didn't notice this yet, 2.7-5 reverted the change of > 2.7-4. So testing and unstable uses rule 9 again. I'm confused. Was this intentional? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
