Ethan Raynor writes:
> On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Dan Espen wrote:
>> Yes, a number of people wanted git.
>> No point in arguing against that.
>> It's accepted that git out does CVS in functionality.
>
> But I can't recall when on the fvwm lists the pros and cons of moving.
> I know that
On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Dan Espen wrote:
> Yes, a number of people wanted git.
> No point in arguing against that.
> It's accepted that git out does CVS in functionality.
But I can't recall when on the fvwm lists the pros and cons of moving.
I know that github is considered the place to
Ethan Raynor writes:
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Lucio Chiappetti
> wrote:
>> On Fri, 23 Sep 2016, Thomas Adam wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 12:42:14PM +0200, Lucio Chiappetti wrote:
is <<< a perlism, or a typo for more customary << ?
>>>
>>>
>>> In shell, <<< is a here-
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Lucio Chiappetti
wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Sep 2016, Thomas Adam wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 12:42:14PM +0200, Lucio Chiappetti wrote:
>>>
>>> is <<< a perlism, or a typo for more customary << ?
>>
>>
>> In shell, <<< is a here-string.
>
>
> I wasn't aware of the
On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 10:44:13AM -0600, Bob Crochelt wrote:
> Hi:
> I'm a user, and have been since RedHat 5.1 abouot 18 years ago. I got into
> linux because of the Micro$oft blue screen of death. I hope the FVWM config
> files don't change too much. I know there havent been any recent screen
