On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 08:42:31AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
The point being? We do not have to waste time with that now, at least not
with the kernel. We still need not to get too trigger happy with hardware
and firmware, but otherwise...
I won't help a Microsoft windows
On Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 05:00:48PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Richard B. Kreckel wrote:
The social contract says Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software.
Such a win-port might indeed serve some users. But for my own part, I do
have some personal
On Mon, 24 Sep 2001, Jules Bean wrote:
On Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 05:00:48PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Richard B. Kreckel wrote:
The social contract says Our Priorities are Our Users and Free
Software.
Such a win-port might indeed serve some users.
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED] immo vero scripsit
Someone could always port Debian to the Windows kernel, but they should not
call it Debian anymore, and it has no place in our archives (because it is
contrib [or non-free?] and too big to be inserted in the contrib
I agree totaly with you..
Manuel Segura
Richard B. Kreckel a écrit :
Hi,
On Thu, 30 Aug 2001, A Mennucc1 wrote:
[...]
-why is the 'win' port important?
[...]
(Sorry for dropping in late to this thread, I was too busy lately to
follow debian-devel tightly.)
The social
Hi,
On Thu, 30 Aug 2001, A Mennucc1 wrote:
[...]
-why is the 'win' port important?
[...]
(Sorry for dropping in late to this thread, I was too busy lately to
follow debian-devel tightly.)
The social contract says Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software.
Such a win-port might
On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Richard B. Kreckel wrote:
The social contract says Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software.
Such a win-port might indeed serve some users. But for my own part, I do
have some personal problems with making all free software win-compatible.
Does it serve Free
hi
On Sat, Sep 01, 2001 at 12:21:41PM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote:
On Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 10:32:19PM +0200, Carsten Leonhardt wrote:
A Mennucc1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why? well, there was no big consenous on any name; so I looked at the
problem the other way around, and saw that
On Sat, Sep 01, 2001 at 01:09:03PM +0200, Richard Atterer wrote:
Mingw requires that the program actually be able to build on a win32
system, but produces code that runs much faster, is far more stable
in my experience, and competes head to head with the same app
compiled for MSVC versions
9 matches
Mail list logo
