On Thu, May 3, 2007 6:59 am, Crayon wrote:
> On Thursday 03 May 2007 03:18, Richard Lynch wrote:
>> On Wed, May 2, 2007 1:14 pm, Bill Moran wrote:
>> > http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=39062
>
>> This discussion may be better placed on "Internals" where the people
>> who make these decisions hang o
In response to Crayon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Thursday 03 May 2007 03:18, Richard Lynch wrote:
> > On Wed, May 2, 2007 1:14 pm, Bill Moran wrote:
> > > http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=39062
>
> > This discussion may be better placed on "Internals" where the people
> > who make these decisions ha
On Thursday 03 May 2007 03:18, Richard Lynch wrote:
> On Wed, May 2, 2007 1:14 pm, Bill Moran wrote:
> > http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=39062
> This discussion may be better placed on "Internals" where the people
> who make these decisions hang out more...
Maybe Bill wanted us lowly users to know
On Wed, May 2, 2007 1:14 pm, Bill Moran wrote:
>
> http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=39062
>
> I'm requesting that this bug be reopened and reconsidered.
>
> I'm completely befuddled by the handling of this bug. The message
> text
> suggests a workaround, then the bug is marked bogus. If the bug is
While I'm not using this particular function, I do agree with you, it's
kinda sucky that they just dismissed their broken-ass method. It should
return -2G..2G as advertised and as all other POSIX systems do. And you are
also correct about the "work around" that is erroneous too.
IMHO, this is a ge
On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 14:14 -0400, Bill Moran wrote:
> http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=39062
>
> I'm requesting that this bug be reopened and reconsidered.
>
> I'm completely befuddled by the handling of this bug. The message text
> suggests a workaround, then the bug is marked bogus. If the bug
6 matches
Mail list logo
