Hi Bart, On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 09:13 +1200, Bart Oldeman wrote: > just wondering, but why do you intend to keep two internal versions of > slang? As slang2 is backwards compatible with slang1 (except for a few > details that don't affect mc) it seems simpler to just upgrade the contents > of the slang directory?
I was just being cautious. We could include the second tree and test it while people who like to take a more conservative approach can stick with the first. Once everything works as expected we can always drop the first tree. (I noticed the prompt getting invisible on a panel toggle with mcslang2. Not sure if this is caused by the usage of slang2 or the fact that I ran mc from the build directory.) > And, no, -lslang2 doesn't make sense. It's just -lslang for both slang1 > and slang2. Right. Thanks :-) . That solves the discussed issue. The discussed hunks can thus be dropped. Any other breakage in my patch? Leonard. -- mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research _______________________________________________ Mc-devel mailing list http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
