Hi, Tamotsu-san. Perhaps the difference is: - a bugfix concerning memory allocation - "+tamo" part, which is result thing of discussion by Tamotsu and Alain - a new patch is safer.
On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 05:01:21PM +0900, TAKAHASHI Tamotsu wrote: > Could you explain the difference between > 1.5.6-assumed.1 (Christoph's one) and 1.5.14-assumed.1? > I have a poor memory. > > > * Mon Feb 26 2007 TAKIZAWA Takashi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 11:11:49PM -0800, > > Brendan Cully wrote: > > > > > On Friday, 23 February 2007 at 00:04, Christoph Berg wrote: > > > > > >assumed-charset might be a good idea too. > > > > > > > > http://svn.df7cb.de/debian/mutt/trunk/debian/patches/features/assumed-charset > > > > > > I've applied this one. > > > > The above-mentioned patch is very old. > > New patches are the following three. > > http://www.emaillab.org/mutt/1.5.14/patch-1.5.14.tt+tamo.assumed_charset.1 > > http://www.emaillab.org/mutt/1.5.14/patch-1.5.14.tt.attach_charset.1 > > http://www.emaillab.org/mutt/1.5.14/patch-1.5.14.tt.linear_white_space.1 > > Maybe it is not enough to say "it's very old." > Why should Brendan apply the new ones? > > Concerning "+tamo" part, I've forgotten most of what I did. > But here are some: > http://bugs.mutt.org/2218 > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=mutt-dev&m=110717251200761&w=2 > These are, for some users (like Alain), quite serious changes. -- TAKIZAWA Takashi http://www.emaillab.org/
