On Jan 31, 2006, at 6:25 PM, Daniel Eischen wrote: > On Tue, 31 Jan 2006, Sean McNeil wrote: >> >> The point I am making is that this is in the -STABLE tree, not the - >> CURRENT tree. There is no bump of libc and I don't see any reason >> for the libcom_err.so revision bump in -STABLE. IMHO, it didn't make >> sense. > > I don't think it was -stable at the time. It was probably > 6.0-current and the version bump occurred just before the > release. As a -current user, you are expected to be able > to deal with this and rebuild all your ports if necessary. This is EXACTLY what I am saying. I am not a -current user, I am a - stable user and this happened about a week ago or so. It was libcom_err.so.2.1 until just recently.Received on Wed Feb 01 2006 - 01:28:16 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:51 UTC