Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > > > Why are we masking the non-EAGAIN error values too? I'd prefer that we > continue to return the error code for everything but EAGAIN - like the > current code does. (Setting c->aborted here probably does make sense > though.)
+1 -- =========================================================================== Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball."
