Article View: comp.windows.interviews
Article #1406What is the deal with the 2.6 fixes?
From: Douglas A Scott
Date: Thu, 30 May 1991 18:06
Date: Thu, 30 May 1991 18:06
14 lines
1264 bytes
1264 bytes
Could someone tell me the relationship between the 2.6 source in the stanford archive and the 13-odd fixes that are also there? I gather that most if not all of those fixes have *not* been applied to the archived source. Are the fixes all "approved", i.e., has it been shown that they all repair proven bugs? If this is old news, please just send me some email. Thanks! <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Douglas Scott Columbia University Computer Music Studio Internet: <doug@woof.columbia.edu> <das15@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu> UUCP: ...!columbia!woof!zardoz!doug Phone: (703)765-4771
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1991May30.180620.16707@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cunixf.cc.columbia.edu!cunixa.cc.columbia.edu!das15Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.windows.interviews Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cunixf.cc.columbia.edu!cunixa.cc.columbia.edu!das15 From: das15@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Douglas A Scott) Subject: What is the deal with the 2.6 fixes? Message-ID: <1991May30.180620.16707@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> Sender: usenet@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (The Network News) Nntp-Posting-Host: cunixa.cc.columbia.edu Reply-To: das15@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Douglas A Scott) Organization: Columbia University Distribution: usa Date: Thu, 30 May 1991 18:06:20 GMT