Bug#692154: Shouldn't description mention also 3.2 kernels?

To: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Cc: 692154@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Bug#692154: Shouldn't description mention also 3.2 kernels?
From: Thorsten Glaser <tg@mirbsd.de>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 23:18:44 +0000 (UTC)
Message-id: <[🔎] Pine.BSM.4.64L.1211202318120.29204@herc.mirbsd.org>
Reply-to: Thorsten Glaser <tg@mirbsd.de>, 692154@bugs.debian.org
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20121103020835.GB3717@elie.Belkin>
References: <[🔎] 20121102184757.GA14583@nt1.in> <[🔎] 20121103020835.GB3717@elie.Belkin>

Jonathan Nieder dixit:

>- Athlon/Opteron, VIA C3 Nehemiah, but not VIA C3 Ezra).  
                                                     ^
>+ C3 Ezla).  
        ^

You introduced a pasto.

bye,
//mirabilos
-- 
Darwinism never[…]applied to wizardkind. There's a more than fair amount of[…]
stupidity in its gene-pool[…]never eradicated[…]magic evens the odds that way.
It's[…]harder to die for us than[…]muggles[…]wonder if, as technology[…]better
[…]same will[…]happen there too. Dursleys' continued existence indicates so.

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Bug#692154: Shouldn't description mention also 3.2 kernels?
  - From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>

References:
- Bug#692154: Shouldn't description mention also 3.2 kernels?
  - From: Regid Ichira <regid23@nt1.in>
- Bug#692154: Shouldn't description mention also 3.2 kernels?
  - From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>

Prev by Date: Bug#693848: libc6: ld.so: LD_DEBUG=libs doesn't do what help says
Next by Date: Bug#693852: eglibc: please include m68k bugfix
Previous by thread: Bug#692154: Shouldn't description mention also 3.2 kernels?
Next by thread: Bug#692154: Shouldn't description mention also 3.2 kernels?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread