> On Sep 22, 2015, at 9:57 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Jack Howarth
> wrote:
> Daniel,
> Thats is
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Daniel Johnson
> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 20, 2015, at 12:08 PM, Jack Howarth
> > wrote:
> >
> > There is no
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Jack Howarth
wrote:
> Daniel,
> Thats is
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Daniel Johnson > wrote:
>
>>
>> > On Sep 20, 2015, at 12:08 PM, Jack Howarth
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > There is no reason to carry along the ilmbase and libopenexr6
>> packaging in
Daniel,
Thats is
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Daniel Johnson
wrote:
>
> > On Sep 20, 2015, at 12:08 PM, Jack Howarth
> wrote:
> >
> > There is no reason to carry along the ilmbase and libopenexr6
> packaging into the 10.9-libc++ tree when the newer ilmbase12 and
> libopenexr22 pac
> On Sep 20, 2015, at 12:08 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>
> There is no reason to carry along the ilmbase and libopenexr6 packaging
> into the 10.9-libc++ tree when the newer ilmbase12 and libopenexr22 packages
> are fully compatible replacements. We only have a very few packages left
> which
