On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 01:56:14AM +0200, Rares Aioanei wrote: > > > >Index: mod/mod_ssl/ssl_faq.html > >=================================================================== > >RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.sbin/httpd/htdocs/manual/mod/mod_ssl/ssl_faq.html,v > >retrieving revision 1.12 > >diff -u -r1.12 ssl_faq.html > >--- mod/mod_ssl/ssl_faq.html 18 Jun 2008 05:42:29 -0000 1.12 > >+++ mod/mod_ssl/ssl_faq.html 27 Jan 2012 18:34:58 -0000 > >@@ -500,7 +500,7 @@ > > are done with full year value instead of abbreviating to two digits. > > <p> > > Additionally according to a<a > >- href="http://www.apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#year2000";>Year 2000 > >+ href="../../misc/FAQ.html#year2000">Year 2000 > > statement</a> from the Apache Group, the Apache webserver is Year > > 2000 > > compliant, too. But whether OpenSSL or the underlaying Operating > > System > > (either a Unix or Win32 platform) is Year 2000 compliant is a > > different > > > > > >Looking at latest online FAQ for Apache 1.3 it looks even worse than > >in-tree manual/FAQ.html > > > >http://httpd.apache.org/docs/1.3/misc/FAQ.html > > > >so I'm also not sure what's the option here. > > > I think it's "underlying", because underlaying means something not > really OS-related. :) > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underlay >
note also that underlaying is the past tense of underlie. that's probably where the confusion arises. regardless, underlying is the correct word, so i've fixed it. two birds, ;) jmc
