On Feb 2, 2010, at 1:27 AM, Hugo van der Kooij wrote:
I can not recall having seen a detailed report on what might be wrong.
Manuel's most recent report is here iirc: http://lists.rpmforge.net/pipermail/users/2009-November/002795.htmli can't think of a strong argument against removing el4 dkms- ndiswrapper > 1.38 from the repo, and certainly we should put the dkms- ndiswrapper spec (and probably the rest of the dkms-* specs as well) in the vault.
-shuff --If this were played upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction. - Fabian, Twelfth Night, III,v
http://five.sentenc.es
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/users
