From: Blue Lizard (webmaster@dofty.zzn.com)
Date: Sun Apr 07 2002 - 10:51:00 EDT
On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 09:25, Andrew Dunbar wrote:
> If we are playing it safe that seems wrong to me.
> I've suggested playing it safe by always using
> libiconv but some people want to use what is already
> on their system. Unless it's a known thing that
> sytems are full of broken expats then I think we
> should
> be consistent and do the "playing it safe" stuff.
> My 2 cents.
>
> Andrew Dunbar.
>
Thanks, I need all the spare change (so to speak) that i can get. A lot
of this is still rather new to me. However, the extra time spent
building stuffs like expat when i have all i need in perfect working
order simply because i just found out that it was safe to rm -rf
../expat, ntm the fact that I've occasionally run into problems where
expat wouldn't even build or work properly while it would on other ppl's
systems and i had my system expat sitting unused right there...
BTW, I have never heard of any widespread expat brokenness, and of
course if someone does not have it installed in the system then
whichever type of check is used it will succeed to know that peer must
be used.
Yes, it seems only a manifestation of my lack of inquisitiveness /
intelligence in a particular area but then again, most of the
accepted-to-be-bugs are such of someone's.
Thanks for the infos and let's see what others have to say.
Best regards
-Mark
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Apr 07 2002 - 15:51:22 EDT