From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev-return-5166-arch-gentoo-dev=gentoo.org@gentoo.org>
Received: (qmail 22972 invoked by uid 1002); 31 Jul 2003 18:16:46 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev-unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev-subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Received: (qmail 12750 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2003 18:16:46 -0000
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 13:14:56 -0500
From: Don Seiler <rizzo@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Message-ID: <20030731181456.GA32007%don@seiler.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i-ja.1
Subject: [gentoo-dev] nspr-4.3, nss-3.8, gaim-0.66-r2 marked stable on ppc, others please test
X-Archives-Salt: 3014061d-4d08-4731-94fd-828b946ead6f
X-Archives-Hash: 8faf9982343488a3435a575eaa18a5c4

I've marked gaim-0.66-r2 stable on x86 and ppc.  Accordingly I've bumped
nspr-4.3 and nss-3.8 stable on ppc (they were already stable on x86).

Would the other arch maintainers be so kind as to test gaim-0.66-r2
(with and without USE="ssl") and report back?

Don.

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list