On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 09:19:21AM -0400, Nick Guenther wrote: > On 10/19/07, Tom Van Looy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [...] > > Anyway, it has worked like that since years, and I guess nobody has had > > a problem with it before. I don't think it should be changed just > > because some bored guy playing with it noticed strange output ;-p > > Sure, but "bored guy" can translate to "new ideas" and testing > somehow-still-untested code paths. It's worth a shot at fixing. > [...]
Well, given that I feel targeted by this sentence ;) I think I will look at the cp's source code and try to "fix" that. Could be fun after all. -- Remi Bougard
