Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No. His email prompted my question. I didn't realize he was *sure*,
> and I wanted to double check before I go make irreversable (well
> without using epochs) changes in the Debian package.
> The real problem was that I didn't notice the release of 20.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes:
> Did you miss Miles Bader's correct message about emacs version
> numbering?
No. His email prompted my question. I didn't realize he was *sure*,
and I wanted to double check before I go make irreversable (well
without using epochs) changes in th
Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> P.S. The version number is 20.4.pre20.5a-1. This avoids the problem
> with the fact that the upstream tarfile's version 20.5a sorts (via
> dpkg) as newer than 20.5 which hasn't been released yet. Epochs would
> be another solution, but I haven't decided
I'm very happy that there weren't any serious upstream conflicts to
integrate so I was able to package it quickly. It's uploading now,
but I'm on a slow connection ATM, so it might be a while...
Although I've been told there are some y2k fixes in this version, I
haven't carefully evaluated the d
4 matches
Mail list logo
