On Tue  9.Dec'08 at 19:16:25 +0100, Carlos R. Mafra wrote:

> I also proposed a cleanup patch regarding autoconf, to avoid a warning.
> It should be safe to apply it, even though Dan said the supported version
> should be 1.4 or something.

It is this one:

http://lists.windowmaker.info/dev/msg00053.html

I also proposed a patch to address some gcc warnings in 64-bit:

http://lists.windowmaker.info/dev/msg00082.html

I really don't mind being shown to be wrong about them, but I would
like to know the reason why they were not considered -stable or not
even -crazy-experimental-branch-which-may-explode-your-computer material.



-- 
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to