gmane.comp.graphics.y.devel archive

384 archived articles, newest first (page 2 of 4). Latest articles →

Re: Update
Fri, 01 Apr 2005 16:03:20 -0700
Matthew O'Connor <[email protected]> • #1883
Re: Setup of a nothing - the userbase strength matters not?
Fri, 1 Apr 2005 23:58:37 +0100
Ricardo Cruz <[email protected]> • #1882
Re: Update
Fri, 01 Apr 2005 17:37:52 -0500
Ben Urban <[email protected]> • #1881
Update
Fri, 1 Apr 2005 23:10:53 +0100
Phil Willoughby <[email protected]> • #1880
Re: Setup of a nothing - the userbase strength matters not?
Wed, 9 Mar 2005 01:08:22 +0000
Casey Allen Shobe <[email protected]> • #1879
Re: Properties not inherited
Sat, 5 Mar 2005 12:56:27 -0500
Dustin Norlander <[email protected]> • #1878
Re: Properties not inherited
Fri, 4 Mar 2005 11:21:46 +0000
Andrew Suffield <[email protected]> • #1877
Properties not inherited
Thu, 3 Mar 2005 19:03:35 -0500
Dustin Norlander <[email protected]> • #1876
Re: Bug
Sun, 27 Feb 2005 13:04:34 +0000
Andrew Suffield <[email protected]> • #1875
Bug
Sun, 27 Feb 2005 00:54:18 -0500
Dustin Norlander <[email protected]> • #1874
My Three Cents
Thu, 24 Feb 2005 16:34:46 -0500
William Lahti <[email protected]> • #1873
Re: Question on Developer
Thu, 24 Feb 2005 16:25:49 -0500
William Lahti <[email protected]> • #1872
Question on Developer
Thu, 24 Feb 2005 17:24:13 +0200
Vasileios Anagnostopoulos <[email protected]> • #1871
Re: Setup of a new wiki - the beginning of a stronger userbase?
Thu, 10 Feb 2005 22:30:13 +0000
Andrew Suffield <[email protected]> • #1870
Re: Setup of a new wiki - the beginning of a stronger userbase?
Thu, 10 Feb 2005 06:59:36 -0600
Brandon Black <[email protected]> • #1869
RE: Setup of a new wiki - the beginning of a stronger userbase?
Thu, 10 Feb 2005 00:13:55 -0500
"Fred P." <[email protected]> • #1868
Re: Setup of a new wiki - the beginning of a stronger userbase?
Wed, 9 Feb 2005 22:57:59 +0100
JP Dinger <[email protected]> • #1867
Re: Setup of a new wiki - the beginning of a stronger userbase?
Wed, 9 Feb 2005 22:45:41 +0100
JP Dinger <[email protected]> • #1866
Re: Setup of a new wiki - the beginning of a stronger userbase?
Wed, 9 Feb 2005 20:09:00 +0000
Andrew Suffield <[email protected]> • #1865
Re: Setup of a new wiki - the beginning of a stronger userbase?
Wed, 09 Feb 2005 19:34:34 +0100
Michiel ten Hagen <[email protected]> • #1864
Re: Setup of a new wiki - the beginning of a stronger userbase?
Wed, 09 Feb 2005 09:44:22 +0100
Sjon <[email protected]> • #1863
Re: Setup of a new wiki - the beginning of a stronger userbase?
Tue, 08 Feb 2005 21:18:49 -0600
"Matthew A. Nicholson" <[email protected]> • #1862
Re: Setup of a new wiki - the beginning of a stronger userbase?
Tue, 8 Feb 2005 01:27:14 -0800
Andrew Kaplan <[email protected]> • #1861
Bitching about terminals
Tue, 08 Feb 2005 01:58:36 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1860
Re: Setup of a new wiki - the beginning of a stronger userbase?
Tue, 08 Feb 2005 01:33:36 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1859
Re: Setup of a new wiki - the beginning of a stronger userbase?
Tue, 8 Feb 2005 00:37:04 +0000
Andrew Suffield <[email protected]> • #1858
Re: Setup of a new wiki - the beginning of a stronger userbase?
Mon, 7 Feb 2005 19:08:14 -0500
Kris Van Hees <[email protected]> • #1857
Re: Setup of a new wiki - the beginning of a stronger userbase?
Mon, 07 Feb 2005 23:51:06 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1856
Re: Setup of a new wiki - the beginning of a stronger userbase?
Mon, 7 Feb 2005 21:58:26 +0000
Andrew Suffield <[email protected]> • #1855
Setup of a new wiki - the beginning of a stronger userbase?
Mon, 07 Feb 2005 22:44:19 +0100
"Spider.007" <[email protected]> • #1854
Re: Patches, patches, patches
Sun, 06 Feb 2005 22:20:48 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1853
Re: Patches, patches, patches
Sun, 06 Feb 2005 22:01:47 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1852
Re: Patches, patches, patches
Sun, 06 Feb 2005 20:54:41 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1851
Re: Patches, patches, patches
Sun, 06 Feb 2005 20:31:49 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1850
Re: Logs, logs, logs
Sun, 06 Feb 2005 17:21:12 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1849
Re: Patches, patches, patches
Sun, 06 Feb 2005 17:19:16 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1848
Re: Logs, logs, logs
Sun, 6 Feb 2005 14:23:50 +0000
Andrew Suffield <[email protected]> • #1847
Re: Patches, patches, patches
Sun, 6 Feb 2005 14:11:22 +0000
Andrew Suffield <[email protected]> • #1846
Re: Logs, logs, logs
Sun, 06 Feb 2005 13:02:54 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1845
Patches, patches, patches
Sun, 06 Feb 2005 02:00:31 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1844
Re: Summary and few tips
Mon, 24 Jan 2005 12:24:23 +0000
richard <[email protected]> • #1843
Re: Summary and few tips
Mon, 24 Jan 2005 11:33:45 +0000
Phil Willoughby <[email protected]> • #1842
Re: Summary and few tips
Sun, 23 Jan 2005 18:20:34 +0800
Rogelio Serrano <[email protected]> • #1841
Re: Summary and few tips
Sun, 23 Jan 2005 09:11:39 +0000
Casey Allen Shobe <[email protected]> • #1840
Re: Summary and few tips
Sat, 22 Jan 2005 22:03:18 -0800
Evan Heidtmann <[email protected]> • #1839
Re: Summary and few tips
Sun, 23 Jan 2005 04:24:06 +0000
Andrew Suffield <[email protected]> • #1838
Re: How should the image widget work?
Sat, 22 Jan 2005 15:04:03 +0000
Andrew Suffield <[email protected]> • #1837
Re: Summary and few tips
Fri, 21 Jan 2005 20:50:36 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1836
Summary and few tips
Fri, 21 Jan 2005 02:10:05 -0500
"Fred P." <[email protected]> • #1835
Re: How should the image widget work?
Thu, 20 Jan 2005 23:16:27 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1834
Re: How should the image widget work?
Thu, 20 Jan 2005 23:13:31 +0000 (GMT)
Mark Thomas <[email protected]> • #1833
Re: How should the image widget work?
Thu, 20 Jan 2005 23:09:46 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1832
Re: How should the image widget work?
Thu, 20 Jan 2005 21:56:27 -0000 (UTC)
"Casey Allen Shobe" <[email protected]> • #1831
Re: How should the image widget work?
Thu, 20 Jan 2005 21:19:28 -0000 (UTC)
"Casey Allen Shobe" <[email protected]> • #1830
Re: How should the image widget work?
Thu, 20 Jan 2005 20:14:52 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1829
Re: How should the image widget work?
Thu, 20 Jan 2005 20:07:40 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1828
Re: How should the image widget work?
Thu, 20 Jan 2005 18:50:48 +0000
Andrew Suffield <[email protected]> • #1827
Re: How should the image widget work?
Thu, 20 Jan 2005 18:36:48 +0000
Andrew Suffield <[email protected]> • #1826
Re: How should the image widget work?
Wed, 19 Jan 2005 22:57:03 +0000 (GMT)
Mark Thomas <[email protected]> • #1825
Re: How should the image widget work?
Wed, 19 Jan 2005 10:06:25 +0100
Michiel ten Hagen <[email protected]> • #1824
How should the image widget work?
Wed, 19 Jan 2005 00:39:06 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1823
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:47:42 +0000
Andrew Suffield <[email protected]> • #1822
Re: dropping sigc++
Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:23:43 +0000
Andrew Suffield <[email protected]> • #1821
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:16:07 +0000
Andrew Suffield <[email protected]> • #1820
Re: dropping sigc++
Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:31:20 +0800
Rogelio Serrano <[email protected]> • #1819
Re: dropping sigc++
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:40:30 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1818
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:31:36 +0000 (GMT)
Mark Thomas <[email protected]> • #1817
Re: dropping sigc++
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:09:27 +0000 (GMT)
Mark Thomas <[email protected]> • #1816
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 22:25:33 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1815
Re: dropping sigc++
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:20:57 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1814
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:18:58 +0000
Matthew Sackman <[email protected]> • #1813
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:56:44 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1812
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:35:46 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1811
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:24:31 +0000
Casey Allen Shobe <[email protected]> • #1810
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:19:23 +0200
Kimmo Sundqvist <[email protected]> • #1809
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:57:10 -0600
Jonathan Harper <[email protected]> • #1808
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:12:27 +0200
Kimmo Sundqvist <[email protected]> • #1807
Re: dropping sigc++
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:47:28 -0600
James Harr <[email protected]> • #1806
Re: dropping sigc++
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 07:45:03 -0600
Brandon Black <[email protected]> • #1805
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:51:49 +0000
Casey Allen Shobe <[email protected]> • #1804
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:15:36 +0100
JP Dinger <[email protected]> • #1803
Fwd: dropping sigc++
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:59:10 +0800
Rogelio Serrano <[email protected]> • #1802
Re: dropping sigc++
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 00:50:06 -0600
James Harr <[email protected]> • #1801
dropping sigc++
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 13:18:04 +0800
Rogelio Serrano <[email protected]> • #1800
architecture quiz?
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 13:15:38 +0800
Rogelio Serrano <[email protected]> • #1799
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Sun, 16 Jan 2005 23:17:37 +0100
Jonas 'data' Fietz <[email protected]> • #1798
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:07:03 -0600
Augie Fackler <[email protected]> • #1797
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Sun, 16 Jan 2005 20:41:21 +0000
David McBride <[email protected]> • #1796
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Sun, 16 Jan 2005 02:27:18 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1795
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Sat, 15 Jan 2005 15:15:56 -0500
Aaron Kemp <[email protected]> • #1794
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Sat, 15 Jan 2005 15:48:43 +0000
Phil <[email protected]> • #1793
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Sat, 15 Jan 2005 15:32:49 +0200
Dimitris Koukoravas <[email protected]> • #1792
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Sat, 15 Jan 2005 09:34:48 +0200 (EET)
Kimmo Sundqvist <[email protected]> • #1791
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Tue, 04 Jan 2005 19:59:43 +0200
Dimitris Koukoravas <[email protected]> • #1790
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Tue, 4 Jan 2005 17:44:54 +0000
Andrew Suffield <[email protected]> • #1789
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Wed, 5 Jan 2005 00:24:49 +0800
Rogelio Serrano <[email protected]> • #1788
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Tue, 04 Jan 2005 12:06:40 +0100
Christoph Anton Mitterer <[email protected]> • #1787
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Tue, 04 Jan 2005 11:30:51 +0100
Jonas Fietz <[email protected]> • #1786
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Tue, 04 Jan 2005 09:46:50 +0200
Dimitris Koukoravas <[email protected]> • #1785
Re: Quick question... Is this project dead?!
Tue, 4 Jan 2005 05:13:14 +0000
Andrew Suffield <[email protected]> • #1784
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.