1. SafePeek ?
I just downloaded Win32Lib 56 Alpha.
No program will run, claiming that 'SafePeek' is not defined.
Where is that routine supposed to be? I have safe.e - it's not there.
Regards,
Irv
2. Re: SafePeek ?
Just rename tk_mem_full.e to tk_mem.e, I already reported this one, but
Derek seems to have ignored my latest two mails, where I also reported
other anomalities.
Best Regards,
Guillermo Bonvehí
--- Irv Mullins <irvm at ellijay.com> wrote:
>
>
> I just downloaded Win32Lib 56 Alpha.
> No program will run, claiming that 'SafePeek' is not defined.
> Where is that routine supposed to be? I have safe.e - it's not there.
>
> Regards,
> Irv
>
>
>
>
3. Re: SafePeek ?
It was this way for the Testers and wasnt meant to be
released to the list yet!
If your part of the testers list then I appologise but
you should have read the post by Derek on this.
Euman
----- Original Message -----
From: "Irv Mullins" <irvm at ellijay.com>
To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 20:41
Subject: SafePeek ?
> >
>
> I just downloaded Win32Lib 56 Alpha.
> No program will run, claiming that 'SafePeek' is not defined.
> Where is that routine supposed to be? I have safe.e - it's not there.
>
> Regards,
> Irv
>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
4. Re: SafePeek ?
Derek wrote:
> Hi Irv,
<snip>
> The Alpha was not meant for anybody to try their own code out yet - unless
> you were prepared for some hacking as well.
Actually, once I got the SafePeek problem fixed, my own programs run
just fine. TreeViews still have the same old problems, however.
> The reports in so far have identified a number of bugs and suggestions. I
> am addressing those and will send the next alpha out in about 7 hours from
> now (around 8:00 pm Eastern Standard Time - Australia).
.
> By the way, I have a list of individuals whom I alert when a new alpha is
> available. If anyone reading this is not on that list but want to join,
just
> let me know.
Please put me on the list.
Regards,
Irv
6. Re: SafePeek ?
- Posted by rforno at tutopia.com
Jun 08, 2001
Pampeano: I haven't received your message, too.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Derek Parnell" <ddparnell at bigpond.com>
To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
Subject: RE: SafePeek ?
>
>
> Hey, I didn't get them. I certainly have NOT knowingly ignored anyone.
Also,
> my work requires me to travel from time-to-time so some replies are
delayed.
>
> -----------
> cheers,
> Derek Parnell
> Senior Design Engineer
> Global Technology Australasia Ltd
> dparnell at glotec.com.au
>
> ---------------------
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: pampeano at ROCKETMAIL.COM [mailto:pampeano at ROCKETMAIL.COM]
> > Sent: Friday, 8 June 2001 11:54 AM
> > To: EUforum
> > Subject: Re: SafePeek ?
> >
> >
> > >
> >
> > Just rename tk_mem_full.e to tk_mem.e, I already reported
> > this one, but
> > Derek seems to have ignored my latest two mails, where I also reported
> > other anomalities.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Guillermo Bonvehm
> >
> > --- Irv Mullins <irvm at ellijay.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > I just downloaded Win32Lib 56 Alpha.
> > > No program will run, claiming that 'SafePeek' is not defined.
> > > Where is that routine supposed to be? I have safe.e - it's
> > not there.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Irv
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
>
7. Re: SafePeek ?
Sorry about this mess that my mails caused, they were sent directly to
Derek and not to the list.
Again sorry,
Guillermo Bonvehí
--- rforno at tutopia.com wrote:
>
>
> Pampeano: I haven't received your message, too.
=====
Best Regards,
Guillermo Bonvehi
AKA: Knixeur - Caballero Rojo
