At 8:29 PM -0800 2000/2/24, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> It's been turned around because people usually just hit return without
> reading the dialogs and I didn't think defaulting to anonymous ftp
> access was an especially good idea. :)
Thank you!
--
These are my opinions and shou
> I agree but the wording is a bit weird. Maybe it should read:
> "Do you want to enable anon ftp?" but if they just hit return it
> defaults to no.
There's no way to make a libdialog yes/no requestor "default to no" or
I'd have done exactly that. C'mon, give me at least minimum credit
for havin
On Thu, Feb 24, 2000 at 08:29:01PM -0800, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> > I just did an install of the Feb 22 snap. The new wording for the anon
> > ftp section is really screwy. It's been turned around. The old straight
> > forward "Do you want to enable anon ftp?" was fine.
>
> It's been turned ar
At 07:51 PM 2/24/2000 -0800, Bill Swingle wrote:
>I just did an install of the Feb 22 snap. The new wording for the anon
>ftp section is really screwy. It's been turned around. The old straight
>forward "Do you want to enable anon ftp?" was fine.
>
>Hrmm.
OK, I am embarrassed now :-) I cant beli
> I just did an install of the Feb 22 snap. The new wording for the anon
> ftp section is really screwy. It's been turned around. The old straight
> forward "Do you want to enable anon ftp?" was fine.
It's been turned around because people usually just hit return without
reading the dialogs and I
I just did an install of the Feb 22 snap. The new wording for the anon
ftp section is really screwy. It's been turned around. The old straight
forward "Do you want to enable anon ftp?" was fine.
Hrmm.
-Bill
On Thu, Feb 24, 2000 at 08:57:11PM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote:
>
> The first time I thoug
The first time I thought I made a typo, but the second time through it
happened again. It seems that even if you choose NO to setup anon FTP, it
still gets setup. Anyone else notice this ? This was through the standard
installation.
---Mike
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PR
