On Tue, 2002-02-26 at 00:31, David Hampton wrote: > It just occurred to me as I was writing this message that the logic of > this test might be reversed. That seems too simple a solution, and I > feel like I've missed something somewhere. I'd appreciate any pointers.
That does sound like reversed logic to me. Unless you can think of a reason not to just reverse it, I would go ahead and submit that patch. thanks, dave
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
