Forwarded message:
> From redhat.com!redhat-devel-list-request Fri Aug 1 17:23:44 1997
> Resent-Date: 1 Aug 1997 15:16:59 -0000
> Resent-Cc: recipient list not shown: ;
> MBOX-Line: From redhat-devel-list-request@redhat.com Fri Aug 1 11:16:59 1997
> Message-Id: <199708011516.LAA02158@tristan.redhat.com>
> To: redhat-devel-list@redhat.com
> From: "Michael K. Johnson" <johnsonm@redhat.com>
> Subject: jury-rigged devel tree now available
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Date: Fri, 01 Aug 1997 11:16:50 -0400
> Sender: johnsonm@tristan.redhat.com
> Resent-Message-ID: <"uaWck3.0.m3.htVup"@mail2.redhat.com>
> Resent-From: redhat-devel-list@redhat.com
> Reply-To: redhat-devel-list@redhat.com
> X-Mailing-List: <redhat-devel-list@redhat.com> archive/latest/2037
> X-Loop: redhat-devel-list@redhat.com
> Precedence: list
> Resent-Sender: redhat-devel-list-request@redhat.com
> X-URL: http://www.redhat.com
>
>
> I got tired of explaining why we were late getting the devel tree back
> on line, and decided to do something about it. It's jury-rigged, but
> it will answer most people's concerns. I took all (I think) of the
> packages that have been ported to glibc and put their SRPMS in
> ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/devel/tempdevel/
>
> That tree is NOT being dynamically updated. However, once Erik returns
> and starts doing more glibc work, the theory is that he'll have time to
> also set up the correctly and dynamically updated devel tree as well, so
> that shouldn't be a big problem.
>
> Usual disclaimers apply: this packages have not been heavily tested,
> yada yada yada...
>
> michaelkjohnson
>
> "Magazines all too frequently lead to books and should be regarded by the
> prudent as the heavy petting of literature." -- Fran Lebowitz
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe:
> mail -s unsubscribe redhat-devel-list-request@redhat.com < /dev/null
>
>
|