> > I don't understand why BK is part of the conversation. It has nothing to
> > do with it. If every time I post to this list the assumption is that it's
> > "time to beat larry up about BK" then it's time for me to get off the list.
> >
> > I can understand it when we're discussing BK; other than that, it's pretty
> > friggin lame. If that's what was behind your posts, Alan, there is an
> > easy procmail fix for that.
>
> It wasnt me who brought up bitkeeper
>
No, it's my fault - I was skimming through list traffic, and not
concentrating, (proof of this is the fact that I've had sendmail
configured incorrectly all day, and been posting from the wrong
address, and only just realised :-) ).
I saw Larry mention kernel.bkbits.net, and Alan say, "We've got one -
its called linux-kernel", (in a separate message without quoting
anything, so it's really your fault :-) :-) :-) ), and assumed that a
BK argument was imminent, and I made a joke comment that it, (an
argument), was not a 2.6 required feature.
Sorry about the wasted bandwidth, I'll stop posting as it's now past
midnight, and I obviously need sleep.
Oh, 2.4.20-pre2 compiled OK for me, I hope that proves I've done
something useful tonight.
John.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 23 2002 - 22:00:21 EST