From owner-freebsd-ports Sun Jun 29 09:44:23 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA07733 for ports-outgoing; Sun, 29 Jun 1997 09:44:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hwcn.org (main.hwcn.org [199.212.94.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA07727 for ; Sun, 29 Jun 1997 09:44:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca (ac199@james.hwcn.org [199.212.94.66]) by hwcn.org (8.8.6/8.8.6) with ESMTP id MAA26236; Sun, 29 Jun 1997 12:44:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (ac199@localhost) by james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca (8.8.6/8.8.6) with SMTP id MAA21636; Sun, 29 Jun 1997 12:44:50 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca: ac199 owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 12:44:49 -0400 (EDT) From: Tim Vanderhoek X-Sender: ac199@james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca Reply-To: hoek@hwcn.org To: xaa@stack.nl cc: FreeBSD-ports@hub.freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/3984: Upgrade for kaffe from 0.8.4 to 0.9.1 (Java 1.1.2 compliant) In-Reply-To: <199706291542.RAA02798@xaa.stack.nl> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ports@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Sun, 29 Jun 1997 xaa@stack.nl wrote: > >Number: 3984 > >Category: ports > >Synopsis: Upgrade to 0.9.1 (Java 1.0.2 -> Java 1.1.2) > >How-To-Repeat: > > Open your eyes, get out of bed, get dressed, take a shower, > put on dry clothes, run around the house twice, enter through > the back door and remember to never NEVER say 'What is this > orange bit of tooth paste doing on my left sock'. That should do > the trick. I'm afraid this isn't very clear. Did you take off your wet clothes before putting on dry ones? How did you deal with the various fences and bushes around the house? Is the double-negative truly intended to be a double-negative, or not? Most gregarious, you don't even specify wether one has to audibally say, in English, "What is this or...", or if just thinking it will do. I don't think that there is any chance that this bugreport can be solved unless a more specific sequence of events necessary to repeat it is described. It should be closed now. > >Fix: Your fix is useless unless you can repeatedly demonstrate the actual existance of an actual bug. -- Outnumbered? Maybe. Outspoken? Never! tIM...HOEk