On Thu, 2002-08-29 at 12:17, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
>
> On 29 Aug 2002, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
> >
> > Yes, this was my fault. The thunks bug was fixed in the Mozilla
> > development tree, and _not_ rolled into 1.1 despite my understanding.
> > The fix will be back in momentarily.
> >
>
On 29 Aug 2002, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
>
> Yes, this was my fault. The thunks bug was fixed in the Mozilla
> development tree, and _not_ rolled into 1.1 despite my understanding.
> The fix will be back in momentarily.
>
> Joe
I hope for a bit longer than THAT..
Seriously,
Most Americans
On Thu, 2002-08-29 at 09:58, Hidenori Ishikawa wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 16:46:56,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Yes, I've built mozilla 1.0 package yesterday and it went fine, only
> > to find today that it's updated to 1.1 and then there's ./regchrome
> > problem..
>
> It seems th
On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 16:46:56,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Yes, I've built mozilla 1.0 package yesterday and it went fine, only
> to find today that it's updated to 1.1 and then there's ./regchrome
> problem..
It seems that an important patch
(patch-xpcom_reflect_xptcall_src_md_unix_xptc_plat
On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 01:03:09PM -0700, walt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I feel like I stepped into a time warp with -current. I'm getting
> the old problem building mozilla where it coredumps in regchrome.
>
> This was solved back in June and my present mozilla was built
> on Aug 01 with no
I feel like I stepped into a time warp with -current. I'm getting
the old problem building mozilla where it coredumps in regchrome.
This was solved back in June and my present mozilla was built
on Aug 01 with no problem, so I just took a big step backwards.
Anyone else seeing this problem again
