Yes, it should be fixed in 1.0 according to the SVN-log. As it is hard to reproduce for me, I cannot actually "verify" it in 1.0. It only appeared once during 2 months of testing and thus might be appearing only in certain specific conditions. Review of code-change in SVN looks good, though.
Thanks... Dominik. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
