>When lnav implemented the support - they did exactly what sounds reasonable
>- they took the tool they wished to support (multilog I would presume as it
>mentionds cr.yp.to) and implemented the code required to produce a view of
>that tool's logs. To say that is a lack of understanding is rather harsh
>here.
Right. I was being charitable; it's indeed also possible that they
*intentionally* did the wrong thing, which is obviously much worse. :P
--
Laurent
Received on Sat Jun 27 2020 - 06:12:05 UTC