On Sep 10, 2007, at 01:31:54, BuildSmart wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 10, 2007, at 01:01:19, Christian Stocker wrote:
On 10.9.2007 6:53 Uhr, BuildSmart wrote:
On Sep 10, 2007, at 24:41:47, Christian Stocker wrote:
On 10.9.2007 3:53 Uhr, BuildSmart wrot
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 10, 2007, at 01:01:19, Christian Stocker wrote:
On 10.9.2007 6:53 Uhr, BuildSmart wrote:
On Sep 10, 2007, at 24:41:47, Christian Stocker wrote:
On 10.9.2007 3:53 Uhr, BuildSmart wrote:
I was asked to look into the pdoru patch and ext
On 10.9.2007 6:53 Uhr, BuildSmart wrote:
>
> On Sep 10, 2007, at 24:41:47, Christian Stocker wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 10.9.2007 3:53 Uhr, BuildSmart wrote:
>>> I was asked to look into the pdoru patch and extension by a client, this
>>> is where I noticed that a similar patch is already applied to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 10, 2007, at 24:41:47, Christian Stocker wrote:
On 10.9.2007 3:53 Uhr, BuildSmart wrote:
I was asked to look into the pdoru patch and extension by a
client, this
is where I noticed that a similar patch is already applied to the
rfc1867.
On 10.9.2007 3:53 Uhr, BuildSmart wrote:
> I was asked to look into the pdoru patch and extension by a client, this
> is where I noticed that a similar patch is already applied to the
> rfc1867.c file
> (http://cvs.php.net/viewvc.cgi/php-src/main/rfc1867.c?r1=1.173.2.1&r2=1.173.2.1.2.1&pathrev=PH
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I was asked to look into the pdoru patch and extension by a client,
this is where I noticed that a similar patch is already applied to
the rfc1867.c file (http://cvs.php.net/viewvc.cgi/php-src/main/
rfc1867.c?r1=1.173.2.1&r2=1.173.2.1.2.1&pathrev
