On Wed, 2003-03-12 at 02:41, Hans Horn wrote:
> A look at setup.ini that was newly created, revealed the following:
>
> setup-timestamp: 1047304219
> setup-version: 2.249.2.5
>
> Looks like stale cheese, doesn't it?
Not at all. You appear to be making an assumption that is incorrect.
The setu
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Hans Horn wrote:
> for some I had expected that this setup version (2.326) would be resizable -
> or at least sporting a bigger dialog.
> I guess I was wrong.
Yes.
A bigger dialog is coming soon.
Resizablility is still in the future.
> A look at setup.ini that was newly cr
Dear all,
for some I had expected that this setup version (2.326) would be resizable -
or at least sporting a bigger dialog.
I guess I was wrong.
A look at setup.ini that was newly created, revealed the following:
setup-timestamp: 1047304219
setup-version: 2.249.2.5
Looks like stale cheese, doe
At 11:23 AM 3/9/2003 +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
>There is a new setup.exe snapshot. It's a minor increment over the
>current setup.
>From an ntsec point of view it tries to insure that the file
permissions *displayed* by ls -l allow at least rx access.
When running the new snapshot, please be
There is a new setup.exe snapshot. It's a minor increment over the
current setup.
Specifically it should address the problems with ntsec being on by
default, and a recent bug report where proxies that need a username and
an empty password couldn't be used.
You can download the snapshot from
http:
5 matches
Mail list logo
