Re: SL's X11 (X11-users Digest, Vol 6, Issue 177)
Re: SL's X11 (X11-users Digest, Vol 6, Issue 177)
- Subject: Re: SL's X11 (X11-users Digest, Vol 6, Issue 177)
- From: Chris Jones <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 17:55:20 +0100
On 29 Aug 2009, at 5:44pm, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 29 Aug 2009, at 18:08, Chris Jones wrote:
Probably would have been better to actually ask what was going to
happen, rather than just guess...
And then get the answer this information is/was under NDA until 10.6
got released.
Of course.
However, its common knowledge that the X11 releases available on the
Xquartz site are always a bit newer than the ones provide directly by
Apple. So whilst it would have been probably safe to assume that the
stock version in 10.6.0 was either newer than or at least the same as
the *stock* one in a 10.5.8 install, it was not a good idea to make
the same assumption about an Xquartz version.
Of course the NDA prevented anything specific being said. But I am
sure a general question about what assumptions where safe or not could
have been answered under the NDA and would have prevented some poor
assumptions from being made.
cheers Chris
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
X11-users mailing list (email@hidden)
This email sent to email@hidden
References: | |
| >Re: SL's X11 (X11-users Digest, Vol 6, Issue 177) (From: "William G. Scott" <email@hidden>) |
| >Re: SL's X11 (X11-users Digest, Vol 6, Issue 177) (From: Jeremy Huddleston <email@hidden>) |
| >Re: SL's X11 (X11-users Digest, Vol 6, Issue 177) (From: "William G. Scott" <email@hidden>) |
| >Re: SL's X11 (X11-users Digest, Vol 6, Issue 177) (From: Jeremy Huddleston <email@hidden>) |
| >Re: SL's X11 (X11-users Digest, Vol 6, Issue 177) (From: "William G. Scott" <email@hidden>) |
| >Re: SL's X11 (X11-users Digest, Vol 6, Issue 177) (From: Chris Jones <email@hidden>) |
| >Re: SL's X11 (X11-users Digest, Vol 6, Issue 177) (From: Jonas Maebe <email@hidden>) |