From 1d66e99de816da3149a82fcd91d1915c0055178f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "https://me.yahoo.com/a/g3Ccalpj0NhN566pHbUl6i9QF0QEkrhlfPM-#b1c14"
 <diana@web>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 20:09:04 +0100
Subject: update for rename of open_issues/clock_gettime.mdwn to
 service_solahart_jakarta_selatan__082122541663/clock_gettime.mdwn

---
 service_solahart_jakarta_selatan__082122541663/select.mdwn | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

(limited to 'service_solahart_jakarta_selatan__082122541663')

diff --git a/service_solahart_jakarta_selatan__082122541663/select.mdwn b/service_solahart_jakarta_selatan__082122541663/select.mdwn
index 3e36519c..07e2764b 100644
--- a/service_solahart_jakarta_selatan__082122541663/select.mdwn
+++ b/service_solahart_jakarta_selatan__082122541663/select.mdwn
@@ -651,7 +651,7 @@ IRC, unknown channel, unknown date:
     <youpi> well, I'd say gnumach could grow a nanosecond-precision time value
     <youpi> e.g. for clock_gettime precision and such
 
-[[clock_gettime]].
+[[service_solahart_jakarta_selatan__082122541663/clock_gettime]].
 
     <braunr> so you would prefer me adding the time_spec_t time to gnumach
       rather than the hurd ?
-- 
cgit v1.2.3