I stand corrected, Thanks for pointing out that my references should have been to OLC 2.01 rather than the non existant OLC 2.1
Balo. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Gerner Andreasen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 10:46 AM Subject: Re: OLC 2.0 > You shure it is OLC2.1? > I think it is a translated version of OLC 2.01. > > as OLC 2.1 aint made yeat.... > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Balo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "ROM Mailing List" <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 6:18 PM > Subject: Re: OLC 2.0 > > > > Hi, > > Looking back to last months posts on the list, I believe Stainless > offered > > his Translated OLC 2.1 patch to anyone wishing to put this up on a site > > although I dont remember seeing any replys on the list, you might try > > searching the archives for his post and asking him directly. > > > > Balo. > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: <[email protected]> > > > Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 12:04 PM > > > Subject: OLC 2.0 > > > > > > > > > > I have heard a lot about OLC2.0, but all my web searching for it has > > > turned up blank......anyone care to tell me where to find it? > > > > > > > > -- > > > > ROM mailing list > > > > [email protected] > > > > http://www.rom.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rom > > > > > > > > > -- > > ROM mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://www.rom.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rom > > > > -- > ROM mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.rom.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rom
