|To:||Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>|
|Subject:||Re: A few questions regarding XFS 1.2|
|From:||Stefan Smietanowski <stesmi@xxxxxxxxxx>|
|Date:||Mon, 17 Feb 2003 22:04:32 +0100|
|User-agent:||Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20021003|
Russell Cattelan wrote:
On Mon, 2003-02-17 at 14:22, Stefan Smietanowski wrote:Can someone please inform me about something..The installer ISO contains acl-2.0.19, acl-devel-2.0.19 and libacl-2.0.19 whereas the RPMS directory on the ftp site contains acl-2.0.19, libacl-2.0.19 and libacl-devel-2.0.19. Why?Also, The attr package version is 2.0.11-0 in the installer image but 2.0.12-0 on the ftp site. Again, why? Same name issue exists (attr-devel vs libattr-devel).// StefanThe re-spin of the installer was done in about an hour. I probably missed updating my build scripts with the new names/versions. If I find some time I'll look at fixing that but no promises.
Thanx. Why I asked was that maybe it was done on purpose for some reason. I'm just finalizing my DVD based on 1.2..
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||Re: A few questions regarding XFS 1.2, Russell Cattelan|
|Next by Date:||Re: A few questions regarding XFS 1.2, Seth Mos|
|Previous by Thread:||Re: A few questions regarding XFS 1.2, Russell Cattelan|
|Next by Thread:||Re: A few questions regarding XFS 1.2, Seth Mos|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|