Re: Policy wrt Important (was Re: dc and bc in Important?)

To: John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org>
Cc: James Troup <J.J.Troup@comp.brad.ac.uk>, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Policy wrt Important (was Re: dc and bc in Important?)
From: Mark Eichin <eichin@cygnus.com>
Date: 25 Jun 1997 15:04:02 -0400
Message-id: <[🔎] xe167v2fqsd.fsf@maneki-neko.cygnus.com>
In-reply-to: John Goerzen's message of "25 Jun 1997 06:27:20 -0500"
References: <[🔎] 19970623182555.09485@gesundheit> <[🔎] dmm3eq8jbnj.fsf@dcsun4.comp.brad.ac.uk> <[🔎] 87oh8uvs6f.fsf_-_@glockenspiel.complete.org>

>  * gcc should be in Important because everybody expects a C compiler

Maybe they expect it, but these days, they don't *get* one... none of
solaris, hpux, irix ship with a [working] C compiler...


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Policy wrt Important (was Re: dc and bc in Important?)
  - From: John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org>

References:
- dc and bc in Important?
  - From: John Goerzen <jgoerzen@gesundheit.cs.twsu.edu>
- Re: dc and bc in Important?
  - From: James Troup <J.J.Troup@comp.brad.ac.uk>
- Policy wrt Important (was Re: dc and bc in Important?)
  - From: John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org>

Prev by Date: Re: Bad Maintainer Addresses
Next by Date: Re: Policy wrt Important (was Re: dc and bc in Important?)
Previous by thread: Re: Policy wrt Important (was Re: dc and bc in Important?)
Next by thread: Re: Policy wrt Important (was Re: dc and bc in Important?)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread