On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 06:08:27PM -0500, Tony Shadwick wrote: > Was this a 5.4 change? Very important since I haven't migrated our > systems from 5.3 to 5.4 yet. I have a test build running on a single cpu > box without smp enabled. Would have sucked if I hadn't known that ahead > of time...
Nope, you just used the wrong option name (hint: case is important). Kris
pgpoF9utqlNQH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
