On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 12:45 PM, Eric Covener <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I believe this is now correct w/ r696366 if you want to doublecheck.
Jim, I think you re-broke it with your last two CHANGES updates. You left it with two "PR 45445" and no "initial-not-pooled" (and latter is committed) -- Eric Covener [EMAIL PROTECTED]