From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Goaziou Subject: Re: Purpose of mk/pw? Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2018 15:40:10 +0100 Message-ID: <878tc7h54l.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> References: <87h8rkg24g.fsf@passepartout.tim-landscheidt.de> <87mv1cs1ow.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87po5jeczv.fsf@passepartout.tim-landscheidt.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40264) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eihwO-0007ia-7T for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Feb 2018 09:40:20 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eihwK-00013j-60 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Feb 2018 09:40:16 -0500 Received: from relay3-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.195]:34973) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eihwJ-00012k-Vm for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Feb 2018 09:40:12 -0500 Received: from saiph.selenimh (000043010000000000000469.ipv6.commingeshautdebit.fr [IPv6:2a03:a0a0:0:4301::469]) (Authenticated sender: mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr) by relay3-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BB056A80FB for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 15:40:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from ngz by saiph.selenimh with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eihwI-0004O8-3M for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Feb 2018 15:40:10 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87po5jeczv.fsf@passepartout.tim-landscheidt.de> (Tim Landscheidt's message of "Mon, 05 Feb 2018 14:18:28 +0000") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hello, Tim Landscheidt writes: > Nicolas Goaziou wrote: > >>> mk/pw seems to have not been touched in a long time, and >>> whatever it did, it does not seem to do it nowaways: > >> [...] > >>> Is it still relevant? > >> No it isn't. > >> [=E2=80=A6] > > John confirmed that by private mail as well, so the attached > patch will remove it. Applied. Thank you. Regards, --=20 Nicolas Goaziou 0x80A93738