On Thursday 12 April 2007 21:18, Marc Perkel wrote:
> Remember even if you don't get everything right by tomorrow there's
> always version 1.01. There will always be bugs and new features to add.
1.01 is a bad version designation. Version strings are no floating-point
numbers!
--
Magnus Holmgre
Marc Perkel schrieb:
> Remember even if you don't get everything right by tomorrow there's
> always version 1.01. There will always be bugs and new features to add.
I do hope Timo will leave bugs and features to the HEAD branch and save
the fixes for 1.0.X :-) [1]
Anyways, to Timo - good luck wit
Remember even if you don't get everything right by tomorrow there's
always version 1.01. There will always be bugs and new features to add.
The LDAP_DEPRECATED define should have fixed these. Maybe your ldap.h
doesn't have the deprecated functions at all for some reason? Or did I
somehow mess up applying the deprecated-patch. :)
rc32 builds cleanly for me (only a few minor warnings) and seems to be
running well.
Thanks!
-Ben
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 18:58 +0100, Chris Wakelin wrote:
> Well, it builds OK for me on Solaris 8 32-bit SPARC with OpenLDAP 2.3,
> with less complaints from gcc (3.3.2), just:-
>
> mail-index.c: In function `mail_index_parse_extensions':
> mail-index.c:343: warning: comparison between signed and u
Well, it builds OK for me on Solaris 8 32-bit SPARC with OpenLDAP 2.3,
with less complaints from gcc (3.3.2), just:-
mail-index.c: In function `mail_index_parse_extensions':
mail-index.c:343: warning: comparison between signed and unsigned
mail-index.c: In function `mail_index_map_clone':
mail-ind
http://dovecot.org/releases/dovecot-1.0.rc32.tar.gz
http://dovecot.org/releases/dovecot-1.0.rc32.tar.gz.sig
Pretty late for changes if v1.0 is supposed to come out tomorrow, but I
can't really leave these LDAP bugs unfixed. They shouldn't anyway break
anything, so here's one more day for you peopl
