-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mark D. Baushke wrote:
> Jan Schaumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>>>"Mark D. Baushke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
Your attachments seem to be getting lost. Your PGP signature is failing
and no attachment is present.
>>>
>>>This
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Derek R. Price wrote:
> 2006-04-11 Derek Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * lib/inttypes.h: New file.
> * lib/strtoimax.c: Assume .
> * m4/_inttypes_h.m4, m4/full-header-path.m4, m
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jan Schaumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Mark D. Baushke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Your attachments seem to be getting lost. Your PGP signature is failing
> > and no attachment is present.
>
> This is the first time in over 5 years I ev
"Mark D. Baushke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Your attachments seem to be getting lost. Your PGP signature is failing
> and no attachment is present.
This is the first time in over 5 years I ever heard that. If I sent
myself the same message (with attachment and all), everything works just
fin
"Mark D. Baushke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I did not see a copy of your shell script version of log.pl in your
> message.
>
> If you wish to contribute such a thing, please do send it along.
Huh. Well, here you go.
> It would be best if you could put it under the GPL. It would probably
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Jan,
Jan Schaumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 'log.pl', as provided in the contrib directory of CVS contains the
> following comment:
>
> # XXX -- I HATE Perl! This *will* be re-written in shell/awk/sed soon!
>
> I also had the need for a sh
I added a few lines just to introduce some hooks which will make easier
some jailing tasks.
Could you make any suggestion, please?
I'm strongly interested on security consequences of this patch.
Cheers; Fran.
PS: You can find gssapi-et-all-051002.patch at
http://savannah.nongnu.org/bugs/downlo
Hello,
'log.pl', as provided in the contrib directory of CVS contains the
following comment:
# XXX -- I HATE Perl! This *will* be re-written in shell/awk/sed soon!
I also had the need for a shell implementation of this script, so I did
write it. It doesn't create the exact same output (instead
Hi Jim,
Jim Hyslop wrote:
> Harald Dunkel wrote:
>>>
>>> Sorry, I did not knew this mailing list. But isn't this
>>> unpredictable behavior a bug, anyway?
>
> *If* it truly is unpredictable, then yes, it may be a bug. What you're
> observing may be perfectly predictable if we understand the entir
