Re: ``ctime''

2006-02-10 Thread Roland Illig
Pavel Tsekov wrote: On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Pavel Tsekov wrote: We stumbled over this on IRC as a guy asked how to set the ``creation time'' for a file, and after a while we found out he's using MC. MC talks of ctime as it was creation time. Is there a specific reason for that? I searched

Re: ``ctime''

2006-02-10 Thread Pavel Tsekov
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Roland Illig wrote: Pavel Tsekov wrote: On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Pavel Tsekov wrote: We stumbled over this on IRC as a guy asked how to set the ``creation time'' for a file, and after a while we found out he's using MC. MC talks of ctime as it was creation time. Is

RE: ``ctime''

2006-02-10 Thread Ryan Weaver
Original Message From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pavel Tsekov Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 6:40 AM To: Roland Illig Cc: mc@gnome.org; MC Devel Subject: Re: ``ctime'' [snip] Btw, Roland, your message reminded me why I got annoyed reading this list in

Re: ``ctime''

2006-02-10 Thread Egmont Koblinger
On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 02:33:04PM +0200, Pavel Tsekov wrote: No it wasn't - bug reports do not go to the developers list. They go either in bugzilla or the mc users list. The developers list is a list where the development of MC is discussed. Really? Then this needs to be fixed in the README

Re: ``ctime''

2006-02-10 Thread Pavel Tsekov
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Egmont Koblinger wrote: On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 02:33:04PM +0200, Pavel Tsekov wrote: No it wasn't - bug reports do not go to the developers list. They go either in bugzilla or the mc users list. The developers list is a list where the development of MC is discussed.

Re: ``ctime''

2006-02-10 Thread /dev/rob0
On Friday 2006-February-10 06:40, Pavel Tsekov wrote: Btw, Roland, your message reminded me why I got annoyed reading this list in the first place. Please, do not let it get to you. The tone here has dramatically improved IMO, and that is mostly attributable to you and your recent excellent

Re: AMC patches ported to mc-2006-02-03-13.tar.gz

2006-02-10 Thread Arpad Biro
Hi, /mask things in the current (/) directory mask/ or /mask/ only directories (path has '/' ending) here maskfiles (old behaviour) To me it is not obvious. When I see `/' I think root directory. Anyway, this is just me. What worries me most is the fact that this patch changes

Re: AMC patches ported to mc-2006-02-03-13.tar.gz

2006-02-10 Thread Pavel Tsekov
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Arpad Biro wrote: /mask things in the current (/) directory mask/ or /mask/ only directories (path has '/' ending) here maskfiles (old behaviour) To me it is not obvious. When I see `/' I think root directory. Anyway, this is just me. What worries me

[bug #13549] Wrong sort order in unsorted mode.

2006-02-10 Thread Oleg Broytmann
Follow-up Comment #4, bug #13549 (project mc): Thank you for the patch for the first problem! I cannot verify it right now - I'm using binary Midnight Commander from Debain 3.1. I hope very much to see in the next relase. As of the second problem - I cannot reproduce it, too, in the current

[bug #13549] Wrong sort order in unsorted mode.

2006-02-10 Thread Leonard den Ottolander
Update of bug #13549 (project mc): Open/Closed:Open = Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #5: Ok, closing. Pavel, you should now be able to close these reports yourself. Hope you could do that

Re: AMC patches ported to mc-2006-02-03-13.tar.gz

2006-02-10 Thread Oswald Buddenhagen
On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 04:27:42PM +0200, Pavel Tsekov wrote: On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Arpad Biro wrote: /mask things in the current (/) directory mask/ or /mask/ only directories (path has '/' ending) here maskfiles (old behaviour) To me it is not obvious. When I see `/'

Re: AMC patches ported to mc-2006-02-03-13.tar.gz

2006-02-10 Thread Pavel Tsekov
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 04:27:42PM +0200, Pavel Tsekov wrote: On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Arpad Biro wrote: /mask things in the current (/) directory mask/ or /mask/ only directories (path has '/' ending) here maskfiles (old