Could you please tell me what, in the following line of reasoning, that you feel is fucked up:
1. It should be possible to compile Pike. 2. Thus changes in the Pike source code should not break its abilities to compile (on a system on which it already compiles). 3. Thus changes that breaks Pikes abilities to compile should be fixed or reverted. 4. Thus if the person that made the changes that breaks Pikes abilities to compile is not willing to fix them (i.e. take on responsibility for making such a fix, e.g. by asking someone who knows anything about the system on which the compiling ability of Pike ceased) the changes should be reverted.
/ Martin Nilsson (har bott i google)
Previous text:
2003-04-24 00:37: Subject: Re: [caudium-general] ipv6 support
On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 12:30:05AM +0200, Marcus Agehall (Trådlös) @ Pike (-) developers forum scribbled:
If you change something that works on FOO but breaks on BAR and you can't fix it, make sure that your configuretest *only* allows your code to be compiled on FOO-machines. That is how I would do it.
You're welcome to do it then. Once again, I'm sorry I did anything. I should have sit down on my butt and not waste time on writing even a line of code. Next time I will think 5 times before saying a word.
marek
/ Brevbäraren