> > From: Thom May [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > * [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
> > > wrowe 2002/07/15 00:42:35
> > >
> > > Modified:.renames_pending
> > > Log:
> > > Two down. Don't know if I agree with the entire host of these
> > becoming
> > >
> From: Thom May [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
> > wrowe 2002/07/15 00:42:35
> >
> > Modified:.renames_pending
> > Log:
> > Two down. Don't know if I agree with the entire host of these
> becoming
> > apr_socket_ foo, b
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
> wrowe 2002/07/15 00:42:35
>
> Modified:.renames_pending
> Log:
> Two down. Don't know if I agree with the entire host of these becoming
> apr_socket_ foo, but, well... I won't argue.
Please do. That was why I commited
On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, Thom May wrote:
> Hrm, think I prefer apr_(u|g)id_
Likewise.
--Cliff
* William A. Rowe, Jr. ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
> At 01:39 PM 7/10/2002, you wrote:
> >wrowe 2002/07/10 11:39:54
> >
> > Modified:.renames_pending
> > Log:
> >Reorder alpha, and clarify apr_group_id_/apr_user_id_ [still some
> >discussion on those.]
> >
> > +apr_grou
At 01:39 PM 7/10/2002, you wrote:
wrowe 2002/07/10 11:39:54
Modified:.renames_pending
Log:
Reorder alpha, and clarify apr_group_id_/apr_user_id_ [still some
discussion on those.]
+apr_group_id_get from apr_get_groupid
+apr_group_id_compare
