Sure stefano, but as I am down with a sprained neck please feel free to do the required modification and upload the same
regards On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 5:12 AM, Stefano Rivera <[email protected]> wrote: > I understand what you are doing (renaming). But I don't understand why > you rename the prototype of run_alarm but not run_alarm itself or any of > the callers. I also don't understand why run_alarm_struct is a good name > for run_alarm. > > As to the alarm GKeyFile, I can't see anywhere where it's used. > > Btw, a patch labelled "fix-ftbfs" is pretty misleading. > > -- > alarm-clock ftbfs in maverick > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/626184 > You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber > of the bug. > > Status in “alarm-clock” package in Ubuntu: Confirmed > > Bug description: > Binary package hint: alarm-clock > > Buildlogs: > > http://people.ubuntuwire.org/~lucas/ubuntu-nbs/32/alarm-clock_1.2.5-1_lubuntu32.buildlog > > http://people.ubuntuwire.org/~lucas/ubuntu-nbs/64/alarm-clock_1.2.5-1_lubuntu64.buildlog > > To unsubscribe from this bug, go to: > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/alarm-clock/+bug/626184/+subscribe > -- Bhavani Shankar.R https://launchpad.net/~bhavi, a proud ubuntu community member. What matters in life is application of mind!, It makes great sense to have some common sense..! -- alarm-clock ftbfs in maverick https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/626184 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
