[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [O] bisected
|
From: |
Gregor Zattler |
|
Subject: |
Re: [O] bisected |
|
Date: |
Thu, 30 Apr 2015 14:08:01 +0200 |
|
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) |
Hi Nicolas,
* Nicolas Richard <address@hidden> [30. Apr. 2015]:
> Gregor Zattler <address@hidden> writes:
> > Sorry, no:
>
> From Bastien's comment, I wonder : does the following patch helps ?
Yes, but see my other email: The fix in
ea575950d957fcecc74ed6f53c29bb6b77e9fe26 works.
Thanks, grgeor
- [O] "not in sub-editing buffer", Detlef Steuer, 2015/04/30
- [O] bisected (was: )Re: "not in sub-editing buffer", Gregor Zattler, 2015/04/30
- Re: [O] bisected, Bastien, 2015/04/30
- Re: [O] bisected, Nicolas Richard, 2015/04/30
- [O] wrong test, fix works, sorry (was: Re: bisected), Gregor Zattler, 2015/04/30
- [O] now it get's ridiculous: bug is still there (was: Re: wrong test, fix works, sorry (was: Re: bisected)), Gregor Zattler, 2015/04/30
Re: [O] "not in sub-editing buffer", Bastien Guerry, 2015/04/30