On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 11:21:24AM +0200, H.Merijn Brand wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 24, 2005 at 02:03:31PM -0400, Ronald J Kimball wrote: > > > Personally, I don't like the new documentation in this patch. It seems to > > > put the focus more on correcting the issue about encryption, rather than > > > actually documenting what crypt() does. > > I have applied the combo of these two as change #25220 > In the future I'd prefer a *new* patch that would overrule the first (unless > that was already applied and acknowledged to the list). Now I had to apply > the first before applying the second.
Ooops, I thought the second one was a combo. -- Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pobox.com/~schwern Ahh email, my old friend. Do you know that revenge is a dish that is best served cold? And it is very cold on the Internet!
