Re: qt - c102 still needed ?

2003-08-31 Thread Ben Burton
> > one thing I forgot in my last mail - is the c102 stings in the > > packages still required or is the gcc transition over so those can > > be removed safely now and go back to the original package names ? > > > AIUI it will be needed until the soname is changed, i.e. Qt 4.0 This is correct.

Re: qt - c102 still needed ?

2003-08-31 Thread David Pashley
On Aug 31, 2003 at 11:36, Ralf Nolden praised the llamas by saying: Content-Description: signed data > Hi, > > one thing I forgot in my last mail - is the c102 stings in the packages still > required or is the gcc transition over so those can be removed safely now and > go back to the original p

qt - c102 still needed ?

2003-08-31 Thread Ralf Nolden
Hi, one thing I forgot in my last mail - is the c102 stings in the packages still required or is the gcc transition over so those can be removed safely now and go back to the original package names ? Ralf -- We're not a company, we just produce better code at less costs. --