Branden Robinson wrote:
If people will build with IGNORE_MANIFEST_CHANGES=3Dyes, we can still
have 4.2.1-0pre1v1 packages for these architectures. This will cause
the build to proceed to completion despite MANIFEST differences.
I caught the manifest change yesterday too and just copied .new
#include hallo.h
I have a problem with recent Xfree86-4.2.0 and .1 pre debs (IMHO since
0-0pre1v3 or so). After few hours of intensive working, Xfree needs more
and more memory even after closing (or killing) every X application, it
keeps lots of memory.
5778 root 9 -10 276M 7992 7680 S
http://www.pps.jussieu.fr/~jch/software/files/analyse-x.pl
Branden Robinson wrote:
On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 05:25:23PM -0500, Bryan W. Headley wrote:
It's there, it just doesn't nag you every time.
Groovy. It zaps my XF86Config whenever it feels like not nagging me. I
feel special, for unknown reasons...
The zapping is extensively documented.
On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 11:57:27AM +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
http://www.pps.jussieu.fr/~jch/software/files/analyse-x.pl
Why not use depth 16?
AFAIK depth 16 is a 2 bytes not much difference from 15 (almost 2 bytes)
what makes it worth over depth 16?
--
Carlos Barros.
On # Mon, 9 Sep 2002 15:34:45 -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
Yikes, a brief look at xvfb-run reveals syntax errors in it.
I'll fix it up for 4.2.1-0pre1v2; let me know if that one works
better.
Feel free to send me an email of an updated xvfb-run, since it is
small and easy to send. No need to
Why not use depth 16?
AFAIK depth 16 is a 2 bytes not much difference from 15 (almost 2 bytes)
what makes it worth over depth 16?
In memory if you want to write bits that don't fit nice on a byte, you
have to,
y = 10101b; /* or however you specify 5 bits you want to go at the
begining of
7 matches
Mail list logo
