On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 10:48:13PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote:
* Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 22:43]:
Let me know if this works out, and I will babysit XFree86 builds for m68k
myself, using the recently-donated G3.
Well, I wasn't thinking of emulating one of those old machines
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 10:48:13PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote:
* Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 22:43]:
Let me know if this works out, and I will babysit XFree86 builds for m68k
myself, using the recently-donated G3.
Well, I wasn't thinking of emulating one of those old machines
Don't drink and derive... anyway, a few comments on this thread.
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 01:53:52AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
Ben Collins wrote:
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 03:46:49PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote:
Could a cross-compile environment bring this down? Is there any *need*
to
"Christian T. Steigies" wrote:
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 01:53:52AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
Ben Collins wrote:
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 03:46:49PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote:
Could a cross-compile environment bring this down? Is there any *need*
to compile these things on an
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 03:35:36PM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
If you mean Egbert, I guess he's at least as busy as Branden. :)
Probably. At least Branden bounces the mail to somebody who has the time to
write "READ THE FAQ DAMNIT"
Not so sure. I have such a machine here, and a
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 07:25:23PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 03:46:49PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote:
* Christian T. Steigies [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 15:37]:
Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how long
I
need _at least_ to get a new
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 12:28:54AM +0100, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
Here comes the new MANIFEST for m68k, I hope its not too late.
Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how long I
need _at least_ to get a new MANIFEST).
Here it comes where? There was no
Don't drink and derive... anyway, a few comments on this thread.
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 01:53:52AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
Ben Collins wrote:
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 03:46:49PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote:
Could a cross-compile environment bring this down? Is there any *need*
to
Christian T. Steigies wrote:
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 01:53:52AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
Ben Collins wrote:
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 03:46:49PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote:
Could a cross-compile environment bring this down? Is there any *need*
to compile these things on an
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 03:35:36PM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
If you mean Egbert, I guess he's at least as busy as Branden. :)
Probably. At least Branden bounces the mail to somebody who has the time to
write READ THE FAQ DAMNIT
Not so sure. I have such a machine here, and a BuildServonly
Here comes the new MANIFEST for m68k, I hope its not too late.
Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how long I
need _at least_ to get a new MANIFEST).
Christian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 03:46:49PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote:
* Christian T. Steigies [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 15:37]:
Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how long I
need _at least_ to get a new MANIFEST).
Could a cross-compile environment bring this down? Is
Ben Collins wrote:
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 03:46:49PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote:
* Christian T. Steigies [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 15:37]:
Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how
long I need _at least_ to get a new MANIFEST).
Could a cross-compile
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 07:25:23PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 03:46:49PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote:
* Christian T. Steigies [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 15:37]:
Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how long I
need _at least_ to get a new
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 12:28:54AM +0100, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
Here comes the new MANIFEST for m68k, I hope its not too late.
Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how long I
need _at least_ to get a new MANIFEST).
Here it comes where? There was no
* Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 22:43]:
Let me know if this works out, and I will babysit XFree86 builds for m68k
myself, using the recently-donated G3.
Well, I wasn't thinking of emulating one of those old machines -- I was
thinking of setting up gcc to know about the processor
Here comes the new MANIFEST for m68k, I hope its not too late.
Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how long I
need _at least_ to get a new MANIFEST).
Christian
* Christian T. Steigies [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 15:37]:
Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how long I
need _at least_ to get a new MANIFEST).
Could a cross-compile environment bring this down? Is there any *need*
to compile these things on an m68k? I imagine
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 03:46:49PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote:
* Christian T. Steigies [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 15:37]:
Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how long I
need _at least_ to get a new MANIFEST).
Could a cross-compile environment bring this down? Is
Ben Collins wrote:
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 03:46:49PM -0800, Seth Arnold wrote:
* Christian T. Steigies [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001213 15:37]:
Just for reference: Build needed 18:30:59 (so that Branden knows how
long I need _at least_ to get a new MANIFEST).
Could a cross-compile
20 matches
Mail list logo
