Re: Bad style in NSPageLayout.m

Chris B. Vetter ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Line 522+ read { control = [[self contentView] viewWithTag: NSPLScaleField]; float scale = 100; NSNumber *scaleNumber; if ( (scaleNumber = [dict objectForKey:NSPrintScalingFactor] ) ) Bad style -- not every system has a

Re: Notify about using the e-mail account.

Am 05.03.2004 um 01:21 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Dear user of Gnu.org mailing system, Our antivirus software has detected ... Heck, these virusses are next to perfekt these days ... Markus - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dipl. Ing. Markus Hitter http://www.jump-ing.de/

NSNotificationCenter throws exception in removeObserver

The following code will throw an NSInvalidArgumentException [[NSNotificationCenter defaultCenter] removeObserver: nil] The same code on WO4.5 YellowBox and MacOSX 10.3 will not throw an exception. So I will shortly apply a patch to fix this. Any objections? Wim Oudshoorn.

Re: [patch] ConfigureNotify events

Adam Fedor wrote: On Sun, 2004-02-29 at 21:39, Kazunobu Kuriyama wrote: Alexander Malmberg wrote: snip I tried this patch and found that the windows of GNUstep apps appear slightly higher than before. I have little time to track it down now, so I don't know the reason

Re: [PATCH] NSSavePanel.m -beginSheetForDirectory::::::

Fred Kiefer wrote: Alexander Malmberg wrote: [snip] Relying on two separate enums having distinct values for their constants is wrong unless there is explicit documentation stating that the two enums are disjoint wrt values. There isn't currently, afaict, any such documentation in GNUstep

Re: PATCH: NSPathUtilities etc

On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 09:30, Alexander Malmberg wrote: It's late, and I haven't had time to look at the patches in detail yet, but I'm still not really happy about the general idea. A configuration file in /etc does make sense, though, if you're running on a normal un*x system, so for those

Re: PATCH: NSPathUtilities etc

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 04:57, Adam Fedor wrote: On Wednesday, March 3, 2004, at 12:54 AM, Sheldon Gill wrote: I'd like to keep support for the root .GNUsteprc file as well, at least until we decide to depreciate it. I thought that now was right time to do so. It does not add

Re:

On Sun, 7 Mar 2004 22:52, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry about the mess I'm away from home and trying to use a webmail system hope you can sort this out ... Now, what is the right behaviour from an API perspective? Well, on one hand we want a place where we can create temporary files in

Re: PATCH: NSPathUtilities etc

On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 02:04, Adam Fedor wrote: On Thursday, March 4, 2004, at 04:58 AM, David Ayers wrote: I understand that you are trying to address complicated issues. I must admit that I'm not convinced that this is right approach. OTOH, I don't have the cycles to come up with a better

Report to Recipient(s)

Incident Information:- Originator: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Recipients: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:oh The file portmoney.zip (portmoney.txt.exe) you received was infected with the W32/[EMAIL PROTECTED] virus and was deleted. ___ Bug-gnustep mailing

Report to Recipient(s)

Incident Information:- Originator: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Recipients: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:oh The file portmoney.zip (portmoney.txt.exe) you received was infected with the W32/[EMAIL PROTECTED] virus and was deleted. ___ Bug-gnustep mailing

Re: PATCH: NSPathUtilities etc

On Mar 8, 2004, at 9:36 PM, Sheldon Gill wrote: On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 04:57, Adam Fedor wrote: On Wednesday, March 3, 2004, at 12:54 AM, Sheldon Gill wrote: I'd like to keep support for the root .GNUsteprc file as well, at least until we decide to depreciate it. I thought that now was right time to

Re: PATCH: NSPathUtilities etc

On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 09:30, Alexander Malmberg wrote: [snip] NSTemporaryDirectory has been implemented and _documented_ as returning a secure, this-user-only directory for a long time. Both code in GNUstep and outside GNUstep depends on this. Changing this would break things and introduce

GSLazyLock initialization fails

I have reported this bug on savannnah as well: 8085 However I think the automatic mailing to the bug list fails so I repost it here. If you create a GSLazyLock in a willBecomeMultiThreaded notification handler, the GSLazyLock is NOT initialized correctly. It will stay a GSLazyLock and never

Report to Recipient(s)

Incident Information:- Originator: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Recipients: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:oh The file information.zip (information.txt.com) you received was infected with the W32/[EMAIL PROTECTED] virus and was deleted. ___ Bug-gnustep

Report to Recipient(s)

Incident Information:- Originator: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Recipients: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:oh The file information.zip (information.txt.com) you received was infected with the W32/[EMAIL PROTECTED] virus and was deleted. ___ Bug-gnustep

$BL$5Bz9-9p((B5000$B1_$G3+6H(B$B$7$^$;$s$+!*(B

$B!!(B $B!!(B $BL$>5Bz9-9p"((B $B$4LBOG$JJ}$O:o=|$7$F$/[EMAIL PROTECTED](B $B!!Ev9-9p$r

Re: [RFA/make] Extend Framework support

Hello everyone, unless someone objects, I'd like to check this in soon. It adds support to pass -F standard GNUstep framework directories on platforms/compilers which support it (ie Apple). Is there any advantage in doing so ? The standard Apple framework directories are scanned anyway

Re: [RFA/make] Extend Framework support

Nicola Pero wrote: Hello everyone, unless someone objects, I'd like to check this in soon. It adds support to pass -F standard GNUstep framework directories on platforms/compilers which support it (ie Apple). Is there any advantage in doing so ? The standard Apple framework directories are

[RFA/make] Extend Framework support

Hello everyone, unless someone objects, I'd like to check this in soon. It adds support to pass -F standard GNUstep framework directories on platforms/compilers which support it (ie Apple). The actual check I'm using is the OBJC_RUNTIME_LIB but in fact it should be fixed to test the compiler

Re: [RFA/make] Extend Framework support

Hello everyone, unless someone objects, I'd like to check this in soon. It adds support to pass -F standard GNUstep framework directories on platforms/compilers which support it (ie Apple). Is there any advantage in doing so ? The standard Apple framework directories are scanned

Re: [RFA/make] Extend Framework support

Nicola Pero wrote: Hello everyone, unless someone objects, I'd like to check this in soon. It adds support to pass -F standard GNUstep framework directories on platforms/compilers which support it (ie Apple). Is there any advantage in doing so ? The standard Apple framework directories are

Fix, NSLayoutManager

Hi, here is a little patch for the NSLayoutManager fixing a problem with layout_char. layout_char is unsigned but may become negative, thus flipping over to huge positive. The huge positive value then is not sattisfying the '' comparison. Georg 2004-03-10 Georg Fleischmann *

Report to Recipient(s)

Incident Information:- Originator: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Recipients: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:money? WARNING: The file note.zip (note.htm.scr) you received was infected with the W32/[EMAIL PROTECTED] virus. The file attachment was not successfully cleaned.

File creation date = file modification date

Stefan Urbanek writes: Hi, I am getting same date of creation and modification for each file. Example: StepTalk fm := NSFileManager defaultManager StepTalk fm fileAttributesAtPath: '/home/me' traverseLink: NO ... NSFileCreationDate : 2004-03-06 11:01:39 +0100 ...