On Sat, 08 Dec 2007, Frans Pop wrote: > Don Armstrong wrote: > > [There is some argument that I should completely ignore hurd-i386 by > > default since it isn't keeping up *at all* but I haven't made that > > change yet.] > > It's been anoying for a long time and there is absolutely no > improvement.
[...] > I think I have requested this before. Can we now just do it, pretty > please? I've modified the code to now have an explicit default list of architectures instead of assuming that all architectures are keeping up [and made the version display more verbose for things that matter.] That said, whoever is responsible for hurd these days should really get it caught up. Don Armstrong -- What I can't stand is the feeling that my brain is leaving me for someone more interesting. http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]