On Wed, Jun 21, 2000 at 07:43:23PM -0700, AG wrote:
Anyone know why there's such a discrepancy? I think the RPM might be
stripping the binaries but I don't know if that would make such a big
difference... Doing a mutt -v on both the RPM and manual binaries
produces the same output:
Hello Vincent!
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000, Vincent Danen wrote:
On Wed, Jun 21, 2000 at 03:27:43PM -0400, Bob Bell wrote:
Ok... I've still got some problems making my RPM for mutt and I'm not
sure what's causing it. I built mutt manually and then I built it
with the exact same options for
On Thu, Jun 22, 2000 at 07:58:03AM +0200, Wilhelm Wienemann wrote:
Ok... I've still got some problems making my RPM for mutt and I'm not
sure what's causing it. I built mutt manually and then I built it
with the exact same options for the RPM but I get two totally
different
Ok... I've still got some problems making my RPM for mutt and I'm not
sure what's causing it. I built mutt manually and then I built it
with the exact same options for the RPM but I get two totally
different outputs. The first is from the manual install and the
second is from the RPM install
On Wed, Jun 21, 2000 at 11:34:45AM -0600, Vincent Danen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Ok... I've still got some problems making my RPM for mutt and I'm not
sure what's causing it. I built mutt manually and then I built it
with the exact same options for the RPM but I get two totally
different
On Wed, Jun 21, 2000 at 11:34:45AM -0600, Vincent Danen wrote:
-rwxr-xr-x1 root root 1262377 Jun 21 11:29 /usr/bin/mutt*
-rwxr-sr-x1 root mail36607 Jun 21 11:29 /usr/bin/mutt_dotlock*
-rwxr-xr-x1 root root 6668 Jun 21 11:29 /usr/bin/muttbug*
On Wed, Jun 21, 2000 at 11:34:45AM -0600, Vincent Danen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Ok... I've still got some problems making my RPM for mutt and I'm not
sure what's causing it. I built mutt manually and then I built it
with the exact same options for the RPM but I get two totally
different
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000, Marius Gedminas wrote:
I've had *lots* and *lots* of problems with Mutt and colours. All
investigations and lots of time spent debugging them showed that the
problems weren't Mutt's fault. I finally fixed my terminfo and settled
on ncurses 5.0, since it distored my
On 2000-06-21 14:11:05 -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote:
-rwxr-xr-x1 root root 1262377 Jun 21 11:29 /usr/bin/mutt*
-rwxr-sr-x1 root mail36607 Jun 21 11:29 /usr/bin/mutt_dotlock*
-rwxr-xr-x1 root root 6668 Jun 21 11:29 /usr/bin/muttbug*
-rwxr-xr-x
At 1:34 PM EDT on June 21 Vincent Danen sent off:
Ok... I've still got some problems making my RPM for mutt and I'm not
sure what's causing it. I built mutt manually and then I built it
with the exact same options for the RPM but I get two totally
different outputs. The first is from the
On Wed, Jun 21, 2000 at 03:35:42PM -0400, Rob Reid wrote:
Ok... I've still got some problems making my RPM for mutt and I'm not
sure what's causing it. I built mutt manually and then I built it
with the exact same options for the RPM but I get two totally
different outputs. The first
On Wed, Jun 21, 2000 at 09:45:22PM +0200, Marius Gedminas wrote:
-rwxr-xr-x1 root root 1262377 Jun 21 11:29 /usr/bin/mutt*
-rwxr-sr-x1 root mail36607 Jun 21 11:29 /usr/bin/mutt_dotlock*
-rwxr-xr-x1 root root 6668 Jun 21 11:29 /usr/bin/muttbug*
On Wed, Jun 21, 2000 at 02:11:05PM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote:
Ok... I've still got some problems making my RPM for mutt and I'm not
sure what's causing it. I built mutt manually and then I built it
with the exact same options for the RPM but I get two totally
different outputs. The
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000, Vincent Danen wrote:
Anyone know why there's such a discrepancy? I think the RPM might be
stripping the binaries but I don't know if that would make such a big
difference... Doing a mutt -v on both the RPM and manual binaries
produces the same output:
The spec-helper
14 matches
Mail list logo
