[CentOS-devel] Re: C5 i586 support.
Hugo van der Kooij
hvdkooij at vanderkooij.org
Sat Apr 5 09:52:32 UTC 2008
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Manuel Tuthill wrote:
|> I doubt that hijacking a thread will endear you to the developers!
| Reading the note on thread hijacking I do not think I'm guilty but
| happy to have a drawn out discussion on netiquette I'm fairly sure
| isn't the right place. If anyone would like to continue the discussion I'd
| be happy to respond off list, or you can grab me on IRC
| Is it possible to now return to discussing the possibility of i586 support
| under C5?
Guilty as charged based on the evidence found in the headers of your own
From: "Manuel Tuthill" <Manuel at Nebula-IT.co.uk>
To: "'The CentOS developers mailing list.'" <centos-devel at centos.org>
References: <47F51DEC.9070204 at ociweb.com>
<47F53D35.7050502 at centos.org> <47F53DDF.4080104 at ociweb.com>
<47F54952.7030506 at karan.org>
<47F548E8.8040407 at ociweb.com><47F54D97.5090901 at karan.org>
<47F54DFD.6000605 at ociweb.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 12:26:21 +0100
Message-ID: <009b01c89646$be2a4ee0$0201a8c0 at luke>
So we should return to the subject of "CentOS and JBoss" as by your request.
If you want to start a new thread then do so. But do it with a fresh
message and not a reply. This branch is pretty much dead.
hvdkooij at vanderkooij.org http://hugo.vanderkooij.org/
PGP/GPG? Use: http://hugo.vanderkooij.org/0x58F19981.asc
>Q: Are you sure?
>>A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>>Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?
Bored? Click on http://spamornot.org/ and rate those images.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the CentOS-devel