This is the mail archive of the xconq7@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the Xconq project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: find_next_occupant vs. autonext_unit

To: hronne at pp dot sbbs dot se
Subject: Re: find_next_occupant vs. autonext_unit
From: Jim Kingdon <kingdon at panix dot com>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 21:15:32 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: xconq7 at sources dot redhat dot com
References: <l03130301b61105fa0782@[212.112.4.26]> (message from HansRonne on Mon, 16 Oct 2000 20:23:53 +0100)<l03130301b61105fa0782@[212.112.4.26]> <l03130300b613a806ba97@[212.112.3.6]>

> I understood the problem was with autonext_unit, but if it is
> autonext_unit_inbox that is the culprit

I believe it is the latter and I was (slightly) confused the first
time I posted.

Certainly it is autonext_unit_inbox where I applied that patch which I
sent.

References:
- Re: find_next_occupant vs. autonext_unit
  - From: Hans Ronne
- Re: find_next_occupant vs. autonext_unit
  - From: Hans Ronne

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]