Re: What's going on with gpc?
This is an apology for not having packaged a new release of gpc yet. I was
planning to work on it during our final exam period, which is always a
quiet time for me, then our new head of faculty decided he wanted the
student grades anaylsed and reported in 20,000 different ways (well not
actually that many, but a lot). So instead of being able to work on gpc,
have been up to my neck modifying some very old Cobol programs (I didn't
know anyting about Cobol 2 weeks ago), sql programming and so gpc has been
neglected. Things should slow down next week when we start the
inter-semester break, so hopefully I will have something finished by the
end of January. Apologises to anyone waiting,
At 09:40 PM 1/3/98 +0200, Kai Henningsen wrote:
>firstname.lastname@example.org (Richard Davies) wrote on 07.12.97 in
>> This is a request for some feedback from current and potential users of
>> I have GPC 2.0 compiled for hamm, built using GCC 22.214.171.124. The next
>> version of GPC (currently 971001) is in beta, but is already more stable
>> than GPC 2.0. There seems to be a few possibilities available. I could
>> package GPC 2.0, GPC 971001 beta, both versions, or wait until GPC 971001
>> beta is released as GPC 2.1. Let me know your preferences, if any, within
>> the next few of days and I will then decide which course of action to take.
>The archive has 2.0-3 in both bo and project/orphaned (well, the latter is
>source-only), from 1996, from Christoph Lameter.
>And WNPP claims that Christoph orphaned them, and Paul J. Thompson took
>Is anybody working on it?
>TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
>Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .